mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-12 08:19:54 +02:00
codex/boat-environment
83
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
42ecc96556 |
perf(ci): prefetch the consumer image and Grok binary during package staging (#15849)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run. > - After #15826 leveled the server shards and #15831 split `workspaces-b`, the `Build` lane is the slowest check: 634s in run 38107578322 (2026-10-11 03:11Z), ahead of the next server shard at 574s. It was 533s in run 38107430861 and 543s to 568s in earlier runs that night. > - `Build` is about 100s of setup, 148s to 195s of `pnpm build`, and 278s to 320s of `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`. The verifier stages and packs the public packages first (84s to 100s of CPU work), and only then pulls the pinned `node:24-trixie` consumer image (8 layers, 440 MB compressed) and downloads the Grok binary (65 MB gzip, 166 MB verified). Both network waits sit after the staging work on the critical path. > - Neither download depends on the packed packages. The image is pinned by digest and the Grok binary is checked against its pinned sha256 by the provisioning script, so starting them early changes no verified property. > - This pull request starts both downloads as background children before staging and joins them where they are needed: the image before the first sandbox, the binary after the negative probe. It also prints one timing line per phase so the next slow part is visible in the CI log. > - The benefit is that the whole pull and the whole Grok download hide behind the staging phase. The verifier should shed the full pull time on a fresh runner, and the next cycle can read the phase split instead of inferring it from log gaps. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the enhancement** The `Build` PR check is now the slowest check in the run. Its last step, the public npm install verifier, pulls the consumer Docker image and downloads the Grok binary only after it has finished staging and packing the eighteen public packages. Both downloads could run while the packages are staged. **Why is this needed** The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the most recent fully green run (38107578322), `Build` took 634s: `pnpm build` 195s and the verifier 320s. The verifier's log shows the staging phase ends at +100s and the Grok result arrives at +267s. The image pull and the Grok download are inside that second window, in series with the consumer install and the probes. **Proposed solution** Start `docker pull --platform linux/amd64 <pinned image>` and `provision-grok.mjs` as background children at the top of the verifier, before the staging loop. Await the image right before the first sandbox call. Provision Grok into a prefetch directory and rename it into `native/grok` only after the "npm must not provision Grok" assertion and the negative probe, so that assertion keeps its meaning and only the positive probe sees the binary. Print a `paperclip.public-npm-install.timing.v1` line with wall time per phase and the time the main flow waited on each prefetch. **Alternatives considered** - Run the verifier as its own job in parallel with `Build`. It needs the full `pnpm build` output, so that job would be as long as `Build` is now. - Warm the consumer npm cache from an Actions cache. That changes the "clean public npm install" property the verifier reports. Not done here; the new timing line will show whether the consumer install is worth that discussion. - Pack the eighteen packages concurrently. The three bundled packages run their own npm installs in series inside `prepareBundledPackage`, which is synchronous. A larger restructure; left for a later cycle with timing data. - Overlap the Pi runtime setup with the Grok probes. Both use the same consumer directory from separate containers, and the probes after provisioning are short. Not worth the concurrency on shared state. ## What Changed - `scripts/prefetch-child.mjs` (new): `startPrefetch({ name, cmd, args, cwd, env, logPath })` spawns a background child with no inherited terminal and its stdout and stderr in a log file, and returns `{ name, child, done, durationMs }`. `done` resolves on exit 0 and otherwise rejects with the tail of the log; the rejection is observed inside the helper, so an unawaited failure never becomes an unhandled rejection. `durationMs` ends at the child's last write to its log (the exit event is observed late when the caller is blocked in synchronous work; both downloads print their final status line as they complete). `stopPrefetches(prefetches, { graceMs })` sends `SIGTERM` to every child still running, escalates to `SIGKILL` after the grace period, and resolves only once all of them have exited. - `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: the image pull and the Grok provisioning start through the helper inside the `try` block, before the staging loop. The main flow awaits the image before the first `npm install` sandbox and awaits Grok after the negative probe, then renames the staged binary into `native/grok` before the positive probe. The `finally` block awaits `stopPrefetches` and only then removes the scratch root, so cleanup never races a child's writes. The script prints one timing JSON line after the Pi probe, with the per-phase wall times, the two `*_wait_ms` values, and the corrected `*_prefetch_ms` values. - `scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs` (new): seven tests run small local Node children, with no Docker or network: a successful prefetch resolves and keeps its output; the duration ends at the download even when the parent is blocked for 1.5s; a nonzero exit rejects with the log tail; a command that cannot start rejects instead of hanging the join or the stop; stopping a running child waits for its exit; a child that ignores `SIGTERM` is killed after the grace period; an unawaited failure does not produce an unhandled rejection in a fresh process. - `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: the source test asserts that exactly the pinned image is pulled for `linux/amd64`, that Grok is provisioned into the prefetch directory and never straight into `native/grok`, that both prefetches start before staging, that the image is joined before the first sandbox, that the rename happens after the npm assertion and the negative probe and before the positive probe, that the verifier imports the helper, and that `stopPrefetches` is awaited before the single `rmSync(root, ...)`. - `package.json`: `test:release-registry` runs the new test file. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/cursor-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/retain-runner-qualification-packages.test.mjs`: 22 pass (7 new in `prefetch-child.test.mjs`, 12 in the sandbox file). The new file passed on three consecutive runs. - `node --check scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs` passes. - `node packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/provision-grok.mjs <scratch>/prefetch/grok` on this host: `Verified Grok 1.0.13 (linux-x64)` in 1.0s, `native/grok` absent before the move, 166079904 bytes in place after it. - Docker is not installed on the host that produced this PR, so the verifier was not run end to end locally. This PR's own `Build` job runs `node scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs` from the branch checkout, so it exercises the change in full. **Measured on this PR's first CI run** ([38108964834](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38108964834), created 03:37Z), against two `master` runs created in the same twelve minutes: | | 38108878166 (`master`, 03:35Z) | 38108995800 (`master`, 03:37Z) | 38108964834 (this PR, 03:37Z) | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Verifier step | 307s | 248s | 219s | | `Build` job | 555s | 484s | 459s | | Slowest check in the run | `Build` 555s | server (8/12) 535s | server (12/12) 547s | The PR run's timing line: `stage_packages_ms 84464`, `image_wait_ms 1`, `consumer_install_ms 97305`, `lifecycle_rebuild_ms 3545`, `codex_probe_ms 1211`, `grok_wait_ms 0`, `grok_probes_ms 626`, `pi_setup_ms 22194`, `pi_probe_ms 7753`. Both waits are at most 1ms, so the staging phase hid both downloads in full. The window from the end of staging to the Grok result went from 161s to 167s on the two runs that motivated this PR to 102s here, so the hidden downloads were about 60s on a fresh `runs-on` spot instance. Against the two same-window `master` runs, the verifier step is 29s to 88s shorter and `Build` is 25s to 96s shorter; the spread is runner variance in `pnpm build` and the consumer install. The `image_prefetch_ms` and `grok_prefetch_ms` values on that first run (84550 and 186696) were the parent's late observation of each exit, not download times; that is the first Greptile finding, fixed by the second commit, which measures from the download's last output instead. ## Risks - Low risk. The verifier proves the same properties in the same order. The only ordering change is that the downloads start earlier; every assertion, probe, and sandbox argument is unchanged. - The Grok binary is written under the scratch root in a `prefetch` directory during staging. That directory is never mounted into a container, and the `native/grok` assertion still runs against an absent path. - A prefetch that fails early now fails the step at its join point, where the old code would have failed at the same download a few seconds later. Same outcome, same message source. - `*_prefetch_ms` is a last-output time. A child that printed early and then kept working silently would be under-reported; neither `docker pull` nor `provision-grok.mjs` behaves that way (both print their final status as they finish), and a silent child falls back to the observed exit time. - Cleanup now waits up to 5s for a child that ignores `SIGTERM` before killing it, so a failing run can end up to 5s later than before. Both children exit promptly on `SIGTERM` in practice. - The timing line is one more stdout line. Nothing in the repository parses the verifier's stdout; the two workflows that run it write the output to the job log or to a file. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, running as a Paperclip agent through the Claude local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). The agent collected the CI data, made the change, ran the tests, and wrote this description. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
8dd381f5dd |
perf(ci): run the db project as its own workspaces-c lane (#15831)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest
check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run.
> - The `General tests (workspaces-b)` lane runs every non-server Vitest
project except `ui` and `cli` in one job, one project after the other.
After #15826 leveled the server shards, this lane became the slowest
check: 593s in run 38084171761, 523s in 38083084276 and 499s in
38083020834 (all 2026-10-10).
> - The `@paperclipai/db` project alone is 168s to 250s of that lane's
436s to 513s of vitest time. Its `client.test.ts` suite is 117s to 189s
and `backup-lib.test.ts` is 70s to 107s. The other seventeen projects
together are only 263s to 276s.
> - Vitest's native `--shard` does not level this lane. The db project
is already file-parallel, and a hash-ordered slice can put both slow
suites on one runner.
> - This pull request moves the db project into its own `workspaces-c`
lane in both `pr-trusted.yml` and `release-verify.yml`. The runner
script gains a `general-workspaces-c` group, and `general-workspaces-b`
drops the db project.
> - The benefit is that both lanes should finish in about 230s to 340s
instead of 499s to 593s, and `workspaces-b` leaves the critical path.
The cost is one more job per run, about 60s of setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Describe the enhancement**
The `General tests (workspaces-b)` PR check is the slowest check in the
run. It runs seventeen Vitest projects in sequence on one runner. The
`@paperclipai/db` project is one third to one half of its vitest time.
**Why is this needed**
The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the
last three fully green runs on the current server-shard manifest,
`workspaces-b` took 499s, 523s and 593s (runs 38083020834, 38083084276
and 38084171761, 2026-10-10). The next slowest lanes, `Build` and the
server shards, sit at about 480s to 570s. A split of `workspaces-b`
removes 170s to 250s from this lane.
**Proposed solution**
Run the `@paperclipai/db` project as its own lane,
`general-workspaces-c`. Keep the other seventeen projects in
`general-workspaces-b`. Add the lane to both the PR and the release
verification matrix. Extend the guard tests so the three workspace lanes
still cover the root Vitest project list exactly once, so the new group
rejects shard flags, and so both workflows carry the lane unsharded.
**Alternatives considered**
- Vitest native `--shard` on `workspaces-b`, as `workspaces-a` does. The
db project is already file-parallel and its wall time is set by two long
suites, so a hash-ordered slice does not give a predictable split.
- Move `adapter-utils` (115s to 117s) into the new lane as well. That
makes the db lane 285s to 366s of tests and the rest 147s to 160s, which
is less level than db alone (168s to 250s) against the rest (263s to
276s).
- Three lanes. Not needed now: after this split both lanes sit under the
server shards and `Build`, so a third runner would not shorten the run.
## What Changed
- `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`: new `general-workspaces-c` group that
runs `@paperclipai/db` alone. `general-workspaces-b` now excludes it.
Local `--mode all` runs all four general groups, so every project still
runs once. The dry-run output reports the new group's projects.
- `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: a `workspaces-c` entry in the
general tests matrix, with a comment that records the 2026-10-10
measurements.
- `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: the same `workspaces-c` entry,
to keep parity with the PR workflow.
- `scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: the coverage
test includes the new group; shard flags are rejected for both
`workspaces-b` and `workspaces-c`; a new test asserts that
`workspaces-c` runs only the db project, that `workspaces-b` no longer
carries it, and that both workflows list both lanes without shard
arguments. The workflow check parses each `- group:` matrix entry with
comment lines removed, so a comment between keys cannot hide a shard
setting, and it first confirms the parser sees the shard keys on the
`workspaces-a` entries. A small parser test covers the
comment-between-keys case (Greptile P2).
- `scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: the release
workflow must carry `general-workspaces-c`.
## Verification
- `GITHUB_WORKFLOW= node --test
scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 32 pass (was 29).
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: the
workflow parity test passes. Two unrelated tests in that file (`a
publisher lockfile lets a fresh smoke install retain validation after
... drift`) fail on my machine on pristine `master` too, because `pnpm`
is not on its PATH. They pass in CI.
- `node scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs --mode general --group
general-workspaces-c --dry-run` reports `["@paperclipai/db"]`; `--group
general-workspaces-b` reports the other seventeen projects.
- Both workflow files parse as YAML; the general tests matrix has 19
entries in `pr-trusted.yml` and 17 in `release-verify.yml`.
- This PR's own run exercises the script change but not the workflow
change: `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so the matrix comes from
`master` and the `workspaces-c` job appears only on PR runs created
after the merge. Because the script comes from this branch, the
`workspaces-b` job in this PR's run (38090713637) ran the seventeen
remaining projects and finished in 340s, inside the expected 325s to
340s band. No job in that run ran `@paperclipai/db`.
- To cover the gap, I ran the new lane locally with the same command CI
uses, `pnpm test:run:general -- --group general-workspaces-c`: 49 test
files, 180 tests, all passed, 111s of vitest time (
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4f680bc85c |
fix(release): retry verified canary tarball 404s (#15768)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Canary releases test the published npm packages through a clean onboarding install. > - A package can be announced in registry metadata while a fresh install gets a tarball 404. > - The existing ETARGET retry does not cover that distinct error. > - This pull request retries only a verified public canary tarball acquisition failure. > - Permanent errors still fail, and onboarding runs once after acquisition succeeds. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15743 **What happened?** The [Release run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37998601578) published canary `2026.1009.0-canary.17`. Its registry verification and publisher install passed. The separate fresh onboarding install then failed with a final npm E404 for that exact `@paperclipai/server` tarball. The tarball was available on a later read. This is a separate failure from ETARGET; it does not prove the cause of the registry visibility difference. **Expected behavior** Allow a bounded acquisition retry when the effective registry is public npm and fresh primary metadata announces the exact released canary tarball. Keep other E404, authentication, configuration, and onboarding errors fatal. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run the offline helper fixture with a first-attempt E404 for an allowlisted package at the requested canary version. 2. Return canonical effective npm registry configuration and matching primary metadata. 3. Make the second install succeed. Confirm two installs and one onboarding invocation. 4. Keep the tarball unavailable. Confirm three installs, a final failure, and no onboarding invocation. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed run used commit `ce024457f3d747657501fbcfe8eac71f6772150f`. This fix builds on the merged acquisition helper and current master. **Deployment mode** Other: the published npm canary onboarding check in release CI. ## What Changed - Add a canary-only classifier for one unambiguous final E404 at the canonical tarball URL of a CI-published package from the existing release manifest. - Query effective npm registry configuration in the failed install's prefix, environment, and working directory. Keep bounded configuration output in memory without logging it. Respect scoped registry precedence. - Require fresh primary metadata to match the package, version, tarball URL, and valid SHA512 integrity syntax. Reject redirects, conflicting errors, truncated logs, other artifacts, and unknown or custom effective registries. - Share one five-second configuration and metadata deadline within the existing two-minute acquisition budget. Keep three install attempts, refreshed retry metadata, process cleanup, and one onboarding invocation. - Bound metadata header and body waits even if transport abort propagation stalls. Cancel the reader and any late response body without waiting for cancellation acknowledgements. - Preserve the existing ETARGET classifier and its character-based stderr tail. Add offline subprocess, actual npm configuration, body cancellation, budget, identity, and failure tests. Document the scope and limits. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs`: 73 passed, no skips, under Node 22 on the PR head. - `pnpm test:release-registry`: 153 passed, no skips, on the PR head. This includes the existing real Playwright cleanup and startup timeout tests. - [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38011028296) passed on this head. The rollup has 53 successful checks and two expected Storybook skips. This includes typecheck, build, the full general and serialized test suites, E2E, and Canary Dry Run. - The new tests use fixture-owned npm configuration and local HTTP servers. No published canary tarballs were downloaded or installed for this change. No release or deployment was triggered. - `pnpm test:run` was not run locally. The full split test suites passed in hosted CI. Independent source checks on this head passed 46 committed tests, 22 boundary checks, and six negative controls. Greptile scored this head 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - The source diff and PR text were checked for secrets, private identifiers, and unintended artifacts. ## Risks - The new retry is conservative. A configuration capture over 4 KiB, metadata over 64 KiB, or a check that exceeds five seconds denies retry. A persistent tarball failure still fails after three installs. - Matching primary metadata proves the announced artifact identity and integrity syntax. It does not independently verify tarball bytes. The subsequent npm install retains its integrity check. - Registry checks use npm's resolved global and applicable scope values. They do not add credentials or change npm configuration. Existing ETARGET behavior, onboarding assertions, and overall startup deadlines remain unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex). The exact model variant and context window are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code execution, offline fixtures, and GitHub API tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
40701adecf |
fix(release): preserve pinned master identity for canary publishing (#15770)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A master push publishes a canary from its exact source commit. > - The publisher now checks out that commit by SHA. Git leaves HEAD detached. > - The release script requires the local branch name to be master. > - This pull request verifies the trusted push and source before attaching local master at the same commit. > - The canary can pass the existing branch guard without following a newer master tip. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #15712 pinned the publisher checkout and bound the smoke lockfile to its source. I searched open PRs and issues for canary, detached HEAD, and checkout fixes. No overlapping fix was found. #15768 addresses a later tarball visibility error and does not change this branch guard. **What happened?** The canary publisher checks out the exact push SHA. The checkout is detached. `release.sh canary --skip-verify` then fails because the local branch is not master. Publication does not start. The [failed master run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38008956836) shows this failure. **Expected behavior** The trusted master publisher must keep the exact verified push commit and pass the existing local master guard. It must not follow a newer branch tip. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Check out a master push commit by its full SHA. 2. Confirm that HEAD is detached. 3. Run the real `require_on_master_branch` helper from `scripts/release-lib.sh`. 4. Observe the detached-HEAD rejection. The tests reproduce this without calling a publisher. **Paperclip version or commit** `baa94bbea58919bcc6cf247a708f04e6e1002679`. **Deployment mode** The GitHub Actions master canary publishing lane. ## What Changed - Add one step immediately after the pinned publisher checkout. - Require the canonical repository, a push event, and the master ref before changing any Git ref. - Validate the full source SHA and require the checked-out HEAD to match it. - Attach local master to that exact SHA and recheck HEAD. Do not fetch or select a floating branch. - Preserve release scripts, local branch guards, package authentication, other publishing lanes, and source-named lockfile artifacts. - Add disposable real-Git tests for a pinned source behind local and remote master, rejected trust and SHA inputs, unchanged refs on rejection, and the original branch guard. Document the branch handoff. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs scripts/release-lib.test.mjs` passed all 82 tests on Node 25.6.1. Twelve new cases include eleven real-Git fixtures and one workflow invariant check. The tests run the actual workflow shell and the unchanged release guard. - `actionlint -shellcheck= .github/workflows/release.yml` passed. ShellCheck passed for the new shell. Full local actionlint reports four pre-existing advisories in other steps; their text matches the base exactly. This change adds no advisory. - Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed on Node 25.6.1. The local tests cover the changed release flow; the full application test suite runs in hosted CI. - [Hosted full CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38011530698) passed all 47 jobs at commit `ffff774a2629663fa71e2fad5143da0696afc5e6`. This includes policy, typecheck, release registry, build, runner tests, application tests, browser tests, and the canary dry run. Hosted policy ran all 12 new guard tests and passed all 67 source-policy tests. - Greptile scored the same commit 5/5 with no actionable issues. There are zero review threads. Separate source review approved all three changed files and 32 dependencies. It passed 82 tests and caught four broken variants. - The supply chain scanner returned neutral with zero annotations. It cannot verify this inline workflow change and reports limited coverage for existing action references. Manual review confirmed that all action references and pins are unchanged. The security, Socket, and Snyk checks passed. - No live canary install, registry publication, Docker image operation, workflow rerun, or deployment was performed. Tests use disposable Git repositories and local fixtures. ## Risks Low risk. The new step changes only local Git state in the trusted canary publisher. A wrong event or source fails before ref changes. The original release and authentication guards remain in place. The exact checkout and artifact source stay unchanged. Revert the new step to restore the previous behavior. No runtime or database change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. Used repository inspection, code execution, Git and Bash fixtures, and independent agent review. The runtime does not expose a more specific model snapshot or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
e9dae72c0c |
ci: use a Docker Hub mirror for image builds (#15756)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Image workflows build the exact source selected for a release. > - BuildKit fetches the Dockerfile frontend and base images from Docker Hub. > - Docker Hub token failures can stop these builds before application code runs. > - BuildKit supports a public image cache with canonical Docker Hub fallback. > - This pull request configures that cache in the two affected image builders. > - The build inputs and publication gates stay the same. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** [Docker run 37995539183](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37995539183) failed before application builds started. The AMD64 job received HTTP 504 from the Docker Hub token endpoint while it fetched `docker/dockerfile:1.20`. The ARM64 job fetched the frontend, then received the same error while it resolved `node:24-trixie-slim`. [Release preview run 37992058052](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37992058052) also failed while it fetched the frontend. **Expected behavior** Use the supported public cache when it has the requested Docker Hub image. Retain canonical Docker Hub fallback when the cache has no usable copy. Preserve build and publish failures. **Steps to reproduce** Run either affected image builder during a Docker Hub token failure. The unconfigured BuildKit container contacts Docker Hub for the frontend and base image. It cannot use a host Docker daemon mirror for those build requests. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed Docker run used `00d944f96c8c4aba8332ce224df2be73a601228a`. The preview used `b6b3cb3761dabd1bd668054e7a99a245d53707c4`. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions image builds. No application runtime change. The public PR and issue search found no matching open registry-mirror change. #15743 addresses a separate npm canary dependency publication failure. ## What Changed - Add the official `docker.io` to `mirror.gcr.io` BuildKit configuration to the public Docker build matrix and the release preview image builder. - Keep all existing action references, image sources, targets, build arguments, platforms, credentials, cache settings, outputs, permissions, triggers, and publication gates. - Extend the existing dependency-free workflow tests to check mirror placement, verified HTTPS, both native platforms, preview isolation, and publication access. - Document cache eviction, tag freshness, canonical fallback, and builder bootstrap limits. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/standard-image-contract.test.mjs`: 43 passed on the final source. No dependency install required. - Six offline controls removed each builder's mirror, changed the registry or cache host, enabled insecure transport, or added preview registry login. Each control failed the new check as expected. - `actionlint -shellcheck='' .github/workflows/docker.yml .github/workflows/release.yml`: workflow validation passed. With optional ShellCheck enabled, the ten diagnostics match the unchanged base exactly. This PR changes no shell scripts. - A real TOML parser accepted the inline configuration. Removing the new block from each workflow produced byte-identical base files. - Read-only registry metadata checks confirmed matching raw bytes and SHA256 values for the current Node24 index and both native manifests. The Dockerfile frontend index and both native manifests also match Docker Hub and Google. No image config blobs or layers were fetched. - Full application tests, typecheck, and build were not repeated locally because application source is unchanged. [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37998739440) passed the full required checks on `25fd57f`, including all test shards, build, typecheck, policy, E2E, and canary dry run. - The supply-chain advisory returned neutral because it cannot verify these infrastructure edits. It reported zero annotations. Independent review confirmed all action references, Dockerfiles, package files, and lockfiles are unchanged. The other 53 checks passed; two Storybook checks skipped as expected. - Independent review approved all four changed files and the workflow graph. Greptile scored the same source 5/5 with no unresolved comments. - No Docker build, workflow rerun, image publish, or deployment was started for verification. A normal image workflow after merge must prove full image acquisition. ## Risks Google is a cache, not an outage guarantee. It can evict images. Mutable tags can lag upstream changes or deletions. Matching manifests now does not prove future tag freshness or blob availability. A cache miss can still fail when Docker Hub is unavailable. The initial `moby/buildkit:buildx-stable-1` bootstrap uses the host Docker daemon before this configuration takes effect and remains dependent on Docker Hub. The registry mirror applies to image pull and resolution only. GHCR publication and cache writes keep their existing routes. See [Docker's supported configuration](https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/configure-builder/#registry-mirror) and [Google's cache limits](https://docs.cloud.google.com/artifact-registry/docs/pull-cached-dockerhub-images). ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact service variant and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
935fb63ed5 |
fix(release): retry incomplete canary dependency publications (#15743)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Release checks must test the exact package that a new user installs. > - The canary onboarding smoke uses a fresh npm dependency graph. > - An upstream package can reference a dependency before that version is available. > - The smoke then exits before Paperclip onboarding starts. > - This pull request retries only that npm acquisition failure within the existing startup limit. > - Onboarding still runs once, and all other errors remain visible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** [Release run 37986221440](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37986221440) published `2026.1009.0-canary.13`, then failed the onboarding smoke. The retained server log contains npm `ETARGET` for `@aws-sdk/credential-provider-env@^3.972.73`. The upstream parent package was published before this dependency. The missing version became available during the smoke startup. Paperclip onboarding never ran. **Expected behavior** Retry a short dependency publication window before onboarding starts. Stop on a permanent install failure. Never repeat onboarding to hide a startup failure. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start the exact-version canary smoke with an empty npm cache. 2. Make the first npm install return `ETARGET` because a dependency version is not available. 3. Make the next install succeed after registry metadata changes. 4. Confirm that onboarding starts once. Repeat with permanent `ETARGET` and an unrelated failure; onboarding must not start. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed release source was `cb291bf1298ab484a2792c05eb977f3440f1f351`. **Deployment mode** Linux release CI. The change affects the canary smoke harness. Related: #15712 fixes a separate lockfile mismatch in the smoke's repository dependency install. This change covers the fresh published-package npm install. ## What Changed - Separate npm package acquisition from the onboarding command. - Retry only the final npm `ETARGET` error, up to three attempts with online metadata and clean temporary prefixes. - Share a two-minute acquisition budget across attempts and backoff. Keep the existing five-minute Playwright startup limit. - Run the installed exact-version CLI once. Preserve authentication, network, lifecycle, and onboarding failures. - Stop owned process groups on cancellation and remove owned install prefixes. Keep server logs and instance data for diagnostics. - Keep dependency-free helper subprocess tests in the required policy lane. Run real Playwright lifecycle tests in the required release-registry lane after its dependencies are installed. - Document the bounded behavior in the release runbook. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: 24 passed in a clean source snapshot with no `node_modules`. These cover transient and permanent missing versions, other npm errors, nested error codes, onboarding failure, deadline expiry, and cancellation. - `pnpm test:release-registry`: 153 passed, including real Playwright teardown with a descendant that ignores SIGTERM and startup-timeout cleanup of a detached npm installer. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm test:run`: deliberately stopped after complete hosted CI passed; this is not a local full-suite pass. The run's 15 warm-runtime real-DB cases failed before assertions because the local macOS PostgreSQL package lacked library symlinks after installation with `--ignore-scripts`. After running the package's local hydration step, all 15 affected cases passed in a targeted rerun. The remaining aggregate was stopped with exact owned-process cleanup. - [Hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37994486323) is complete and green at `1c80e6f`: all tests, build, typecheck, policy, release registry, E2E, and canary dry run passed. Greptile scored the same head 5/5 with no unresolved comments. - Independent review covered all seven changed files and the exact policy and release-registry commands. It also used real npm 11.9 against a loopback registry: a required version was absent, then became available. The retry refreshed metadata and started the installed exact-version CLI once. The one-attempt negative control failed. - The new subprocess tests use local npm and CLI fixtures. They do not contact a registry or start a real Paperclip instance. - The patch preserves the exact-version clean-install check. It adds no dependency pins, credentials, or workflow reruns. ## Risks The install phase now has a two-minute budget inside the existing five-minute startup limit. An unusually slow valid install can still fail the smoke. Permanent missing versions remain failures after the bounded retry. The lifecycle tests cover the Linux release runner behavior; Playwright does not support graceful SIGTERM on Windows. No application, database, or deployment behavior changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning and code execution tools. The exact service variant and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
23b9aaa8e6 |
fix(release): reuse publisher lockfile for canary smoke (#15712)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Every master push publishes an exact canary and tests its onboarding flow. > - The publisher resolves dependencies before building, while the smoke job checks out the committed lockfile again. > - Patch or manifest changes can land before the separate lockfile refresh, so the smoke fails before testing the published app. > - This pull request passes the publisher's resolved lockfile to the same-source smoke job. > - The smoke keeps frozen dependency validation and tests the exact published canary version. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10393, #13689. Related work: #13690 documents lockfile drift; #12115 addresses refresh-PR check triggering. This change addresses the canary smoke handoff. #15678 only refreshed the opencode importer. #15164 incidentally corrected the earlier patch hash on master. **What happened?** Canary publication succeeded, but the fresh onboarding smoke install failed with `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH` on sources `0b80ea17ef` and `ab8dcab809`. The committed `acpx@0.13.1` hash no longer matched its patch. A later run on `6080daf262` failed with `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE` after an `opencode-ai` manifest addition. The current master lockfile has since caught up; the workflow still permits this race on future changes. **Expected behavior** The exact published canary reaches the onboarding smoke with test dependencies resolved for its source. A mismatched or missing lockfile must fail validation. **Steps to reproduce** Check out either affected source and run `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` with pnpm 9.15.4. The smoke fails before a browser starts, although the publisher already installed that source with a resolved lockfile. ## What Changed - Pin both canary publisher and onboarding smoke checkouts to the triggering SHA. - Save the publisher's resolved lockfile before restoring tracked files or rewriting release versions. - Restore that same-run, source-named artifact before the unchanged frozen smoke install. - Add offline real-pnpm regressions for patch-hash and manifest drift, plus wrong-source rejection and workflow binding checks. - Document artifact retention and job reruns. No manifest or committed lockfile changes. ## Verification - Focused release workflow, exact-source verification and image-contract tests: 45 passed. - Negative control: both new real-pnpm fixture cases fail against the original workflow with their respective original lockfile errors; both pass with the handoff. - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` passed on the current source. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after reclaiming disposable build-cache space. - The browser onboarding smoke passed against exact published `2026.1009.0-canary.7`: 1 test passed using a fresh temporary instance. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted twice. The first hit disk exhaustion; the second reported one chat integration failure and then a Vitest worker `ENOTCONN` crash before completing. This is not a full-suite pass. The named chat case passed in isolation without changes. All full sharded PR CI checks passed on the final head. - Independent source review and a clean-checkout run also passed all 45 focused tests, with separate real-pnpm negative controls. - The supply-chain scan is neutral because managed intelligence could not scan the pinned official `download-artifact` action. It reported no defect; independent review inspected the action source, same-run scope and v4/v4 compatibility. - Reviewed the diff for secrets, personal data and generated artifacts; none found. ## Risks - The smoke now depends on a same-run GitHub artifact retained for 14 days. A missing artifact intentionally fails instead of resolving a different dependency set. - A publisher rerun replaces its source-named artifact; a smoke-only rerun reuses the retained artifact. - Frozen validation and the exact published version remain required. The source app and publication logic do not change. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool execution and parallel independent review. The exact serving variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
57e977be72 |
feat: integrate Pi 1.0 into the experimental Runner (#14921)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - The experimental Runner owns provider processes and durable sessions. > - Pi needs working task execution and human controls. > - The five-PR stack must preserve changes already on master. > - Each layer now carries the complete integrated source for a safe sequential fallback. > - This PR belongs to native GitHub stack #15602, ending at #14956. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14436, #14631, #14743 and #14956. Ship Pi 1.0 through the experimental Paperclip Runner. The five PRs are #14921, #14922, #14923, #14924 and #14956. The user authorized the complete merge after checks pass. Existing `pi_local` execution is unchanged. Accounting and wider provider/platform qualification remain deferred. ## What Changed - Recover missing final replies after workspace finalization changes owners, using accepted-turn evidence without rerunning work or granting external-chat publication. - Preserve the admitted Pi instruction root across warm runs, while retaining changed-root rejection. - Give Pi a bounded 15-second default shutdown grace so stop, drain acknowledgement and durable suspension can complete. Explicit deadlines and other providers retain their existing behavior. - Integrate the Pi 1.0 runtime and master contracts. - Use Pi profile 22. Preserve explicit caller-selected models and exact native thinking levels. Keep Pi's wrapper, helper, extension and question/control behavior unchanged from the qualified profile-19 runtime. - Preserve master's Dot lifecycle and consent fields, configured task environment, status guards and current Codex/Claude dependency versions. Cursor stays qualified. Copilot stays pending; profile 17 binds the changed shared protocol validation sources. - Exclude general AWS IAM credentials from Pi static/custom provider bindings and selected task projections; preserve the provider-scoped Bedrock bearer key. Profile 21 is retained as historical provenance. Rust and cloud install probes use the current declaration. - Patch bundled brace-expansion 5.0.9 to the exact official 5.0.12 payload. Pin the patch and complete runtime closures. Include the patch in normal installed setup tooling. Keep the upstream Pi shrinkwrap as provenance and permit only this exact security correction. - Include current attestation files in the Docker build context. Keep the repository lockfile unchanged from master. CI and private image builds resolve manifest changes before their frozen installation. ## Verification - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` passes, including Runner Rust, server and UI. Focused integration checks pass: 194 Runner admission/environment tests, 63 profile/credential tests with one expected skip, 152 Dot/UI configuration tests, and Pi transcript/notice tests. - Full local `pnpm build` passes on the final source. - Fresh final-source checks pass: all 698 Rust workspace tests (32 binaries), 156 credential/profile/controller tests with one expected skip, Runner TypeScript typecheck, and 20 package/setup/sandbox tests. - The profile-21 Pi materializer passes on the native host with the official pinned Node 24.21.0 and its npm. It verifies all 150 locked packages, the patched dependency and the exact closure. Setup/package bundle tests and UI token gates pass. - The old hashes were reproduced for all three supported targets before calculating the patched graph. New closure hashes are darwin-arm64 `282022db10150c6632b3444df421342e7d534bdf5d5fb1097a2e79d0625a2bcf`, darwin-x64 `64e251e19009f755c0b04f73ce2138246faab71a961b0f13d75ebfcc34bef12e`, and linux-x64 `713b1fdff42fb56a1518bdc084f181d70bee8ebadc3e4b1d76321ed9108c8410`. Independent native platform execution is separate from graph identity reproduction. - Historical cloud qualification remains unchanged: all seven core cases pass on shipping source `10dc43c9ec65d88c2f782d62afb296d09494f215`, harness `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`, image `sha256:5b3a775b383591bda1b0c1889e509acc70ce7f37c53f09733c81d59037f02280`, and accepted Sonnet 4.6/low fixture. All 215 canonical files and all seven cleanup checks pass independent verification. These are profile-19 results and are not relabeled as fresh profile-22 runs. - Current Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [The readiness plan](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/pi-production-readiness/doc/plans/2026-10-02-pi-production-readiness.md) preserves campaign and failed-attempt provenance. - Merge only after every PR's current-head CI and fresh review pass. Linux CI covers the full suites, build and browser tests. The local embedded Postgres API-authority suite cannot start on this macOS/Node 26 host, so Linux CI must confirm that suite. ### Fresh profile-22 core qualification — 2026-10-08 All seven accepted core cases pass canonically on Pi profile 22, with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. This model is a fixture; production accepts the caller's explicit Pi provider/model. Runtime/install source: `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401`. Frozen accepted harness: `1a4408a48cfb5a1f094a311141c257c92cd7a893`. Immutable cloud image: `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:506f22db7edd78f37c0c40bec1cc084af1850455026dbf467194bfbb8fcef141`. Pi digest: `sha256:e92078bee3c23bec4100aa589013a44613d054cd686826534025d8019e9f39a9`. [Hosted Linux image and clean-install verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868328023) passes, including all 20 source-bound archives, normal CLI/Pi setup, companion import and the production pack reader. This exact installation source includes the latest master integration and the corrected Pi warm instruction-root fence. Full local typecheck/build and current-head hosted CI verify the final stack. All 13 focused real-root regressions pass. The full local executor suite passed 662 tests; 15 database tests could not start the Mac embedded PostgreSQL service. Hosted Linux CI passes the full required verification and E2E checks. These fresh results keep their own source identity; profile-19 results remain historical. | Core path | Canonical campaign | Retained archive SHA-256 | | --- | --- | --- | | File edit, validation, download and Done | `pi-core22-replyfix-0-1791511228` | 23 files; `a473e8603a3dd4737863291f8d3d1e392391f0b16d433c3e0e0e9d8baf7a97b0` | | Pending question and controller restart | `pi-core22-replyfix-1-1791511376` | 33 files; `6b829c4eb74e1f32a89c692a4ae7130dbfc1c6d3cf13915effe2103d9e242c8e` | | Three-turn session/process/workspace continuity | `pi-core22-replyfix-2-1791511587` | 23 files; `7a87021f8f9a3fdd3c58bb4467f8d82c635e3ea4795d6e75f144d9aa14818df8` | | Four typed questions and browser reconnects | `pi-core22-replyfix-3-1791511881` | 42 files; `9e31755252be1f4f9cb0626c984c142d4d1ae5f5bee3a7af08444db8d12c280a` | | Plan approval and completion | `pi-core22-replyfix-4-1791512031` | 22 files; `a0383ce1aab38e7b5a25ce0e9dd3bebea5c037ebd96ae6b29dae19015da2ae2c` | | Same-turn steering and permission denial | `pi-core22-replyfix-5-1791512261` | 39 files; `c929b8c7070f0b66aedc17e65ca46e6beab1e363926ac9f7e2a75fb250f05949` | | Stop during pending permission | `pi-core22-replyfix-6-1791512390` | 33 files; `7f0a58ae0f4d5bfc76149435f4e322537089c5bd16e7ffe9b5ad71f10a621a07` | All 215 canonical files (28714587 bytes) are independently hash-verified. All seven cleanup grades pass, with no owned runtime process or temporary root after each case. Automatic retries are zero. The owned cloud host stopped normally after retention. The prior profile-22 warm attempt remains failed and separately retained: archive SHA-256 `1e54eba5ec72b50cee1534b23d1d1d4f21a090006b8a64501ba70db972abfde5`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Diagnosis reproduced a product bug comparing an agent-files root against an unset checkpoint-only field. The fix stores the admitted physical root separately from the adopted per-run collection capability. The real-root regression fails before the fix and passes afterward, including rejection of a changed physical root. Fixture, grader, model and all seven accepted case IDs are unchanged; this fresh campaign tests final-reply publication after file registration first. The intermediate restart attempt also remains failed and retained: archive SHA-256 `5dcaefdf1d17cf4cd54fd4cf810f45e736667392339b8ce7caf08bb4e225277f`. Its original canonical classification is preserved. Pi resumed, wrote the verified answer and completed its task; exact runner suspension was proven, but idle stop consumed about 5.2s and left under 3s for the drain acknowledgement. The Pi-only default shutdown grace is now 15s, preserving a full 5s drain round trip and a finite suspension reserve. Explicit caller deadlines, other provider defaults, literal drain receipts and exact suspension identity checks remain unchanged. The timing regression fails before this correction and passes afterward; all 18 focused settlement tests and Runner typecheck pass. The final-source file attempt is also preserved as failed (`candidate_failure`), archive SHA-256 `db6767b6773ea618997927ac77bdb005a5ac81492c7b9c0ffbc900449f829bc9`. Native edit, validation, exact downloadable artifact and Done/succeeded all passed, and the exact final reply was durably recorded. A workspace recovery owner completed before the live heartbeat reached presentation, leaving that reply absent from task chat. Recovery now materializes only a completed final reply from the accepted turn of an ordinary internal Done task, preserving issue/run/contract binding, suppression, external-chat authorization and same-run deduplication. The database regression covers the generated file-preparation receipt, suppression, unapproved external continuation and replay. Server typecheck and all 49 response-selection tests pass; hosted Linux verifies the database regression because embedded PostgreSQL cannot start on this Mac. The delayed-final-answer database regression passes on [the final root-source Linux server shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37868262553/job/113628594152), alongside 1,108 passing tests. The first root Runner shard had one unchanged durable-resume test exceed its 5-second timeout; the identical top-source shard and the isolated exact test passed. One rerun of that failed job and its required aggregate passed without source or test changes. The original failed job log and the single-rerun receipt remain retained. ### October 9 merge verification Current merge head: `5a8fe63512a7166aaef5cf50065a25008aa8b44b`. All current-head checks pass, including `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; exact-head Greptile review is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. Current master conflicts are resolved. The user authorized the maintainer override of the code-owner review gate after these checks. The seven retained live core cases remain bound to source `3241a992f2a7703e59e97ed0fd3e5d6405de4401` and its recorded cloud image. ## Risks - The security correction changes the dependency closure and profile identity. Old sessions must reopen on the new profile. Exact identities and credential bindings fail closed. - The runner remains experimental and requires explicit selection. Legacy Pi Local is unchanged. Caller model IDs pass through; the E2E model is a fixture. - Accounting and the broad platform/provider matrix remain deferred. This merge does not publish a release or deploy a service. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with reasoning, repository inspection, editing and tool use. The exact serving ID and context window are not exposed in this session. Final live qualification uses Pi 1.0.0 with `openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6` and native-confirmed low thinking. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6f9d0a56ba |
fix: resolve installed Codex and preserve npm host dependencies (#15555)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Installed agents need their own runtime dependencies. > - Native Codex startup and browser login could depend on a global CLI. > - npm bundles do not inherit workspace dependency overrides or patches. > - Codex native packages must come from npm for the consumer host. > - This PR fixes executable resolution and the required npm dependency layout. > - Usable installed CLI versions can run without a numeric version gate. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15422. This is a prerequisite for the later Codex-default change. **What happened?** Packaged native Codex startup and browser login could require a global Codex CLI. The server's vendored runner lacked its own declared Codex bridge. A bundled wrapper could retain producer-host binaries or select the legacy adapter's separate platform version. **Expected behavior** Prefer the installed Codex executable. Accept usable older or newer versions. Use the selected host's PATH when the dependency is absent. Keep the patched JavaScript graph. Let npm install official native packages for the consumer platform. Grant sandbox reads only to the selected vendor resources. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a clean npm installation without a global Codex command. 2. Start native Codex or its browser login. 3. Inspect the selected executable, installed host package, and sandbox resource paths. **Paperclip version or commit** Frozen master base: `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`. **Deployment mode** Source and packaged self-hosted installation. ## What Changed - Share installed Codex command resolution across native startup, direct evals, and browser login. Accept usable version differences. Preserve explicit commands, recorded sessions, remote host boundaries, and the Linux ARM64 legacy login path. Return safe errors for missing executables and failed login terminals. - Declare the server's Codex bridge. Retain the patched JavaScript dependency graph in npm packages. Strip Codex native payloads. Declare official optional host packages on the published server manifest so native and legacy versions remain separate. Preserve consumer esbuild platform dependencies. - Adjust resource lookup for npm's separate platform packages. Retain package identity, path containment, resolver ownership, and narrow sandbox reads. Keep exact version and digest checks for explicit ACPX artifact qualification. - Extend existing packaging, installed-consumer, login, selection, recovery, and integrity tests. Document the retained behavior. The diff is now 23 files, 1,709 additions, and 53 deletions. The prior diff had 35 files and about 3,700 changed lines. Removed work is preserved on `codex/runner-packaging-full-snapshot` at `6f3060beaa842ffcee21af058370d3cab5f571e9`. Removed from this PR: release workflows and assembly, provider-pack changes, Docker materialization, Git installer changes, extra login HOME/working-directory isolation, and unrelated CI fixture repairs. This PR does not change agent defaults, stored runner choices, UI, schema, or provider qualification. ## Verification - Final candidate: `dde37d7ed0121c10b60b8801eda80f8dc17909ad`. [All 47 ordinary CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37842288835) on attempt 1, including typecheck, tests, build, E2E, runner checks, and the installed-consumer canary. [Fresh Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15555#issuecomment-6059581546) is 5/5 on this head; no unresolved threads remain. Human approval is still outstanding. - Reused focused controls passed with Node 24: 71 initial narrowed checks, then 56 affected Codex/selection/eval checks after the relative PATH correction. Runner TypeScript no-emit, syntax, and diff checks passed. The existing fixture reproduces the original relative PATH failure and verifies working-directory selection, empty entries, ordering, and absolute launch. One CLI entrypoint test was initially blocked by sandbox IPC and passed with its existing local socket allowed. Login HOME, config-directory assignments, and working directory match master. - [The actual clean Linux npm consumer](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37842288835/job/113535523044) passed on the final candidate's CI integration. All 17 Paperclip tarballs omit native Codex payloads. Official npm host packages retain their own integrity and `inBundle=false`. Native Codex selects 0.160.0; the legacy closure retains 0.156.1. Package admission, command leases, narrow native sandbox resources, consumer hooks, preserved lock, and offline lifecycle controls passed. Provider calls were zero. No new workflow is added. - Actual official Codex 0.156.1 passed on the final committed source on macOS ARM64: installed dependency preference, absolute and relative PATH fallback, narrow resource lookup, and app-server initialize/initialized. Executed module hashes match the candidate. One scripts-disabled install, three version probes, and one handshake completed in 26 seconds; owned files and process group were removed. No login, account/model request, or provider task ran. - CI checked out `dfda8e708e87306d22ed735d78bdfcbe770e99b7` on base `65b558180533039a891ee0cd1ccab9988aa79adc`. Its 13 upstream paths do not overlap this PR's 23 paths or alter packaging/Codex inputs. The consumer report records producer `7b8e94c08657b5ddc265946459762340f125726c`, after the existing canary staged a generated-lock-only commit (one file, three insertions). These identities are kept separate; raw generated-lock bytes were not retained. - No local Docker or Rust build, paid provider turn, merge, or deployment. Later PRs must prove live onboarding and production cloud packaging before changing defaults. ## Risks - npm must install optional host dependencies. Missing dependencies still return errors. Paperclip tarballs do not pre-bundle Codex executables. - The repository requires CI-owned lockfile updates. PR CI resolves the changed manifest and stages its own producer lockfile. A raw source Docker build with `--frozen-lockfile` must wait for the existing master lockfile bot to merge its refresh, or use a disposable resolved checkout. No Docker build or deployment is qualified by this PR. - Ordinary Codex startup accepts version differences. Actual protocol or login failures remain errors. Explicit ACPX artifact checks retain their release pins. - The published server delegates platform installation outside its bundled JavaScript graph. Focused negative controls reject unsafe package metadata and paths. The hosted consumer test passed on this candidate’s CI integration. - Existing agents retain their stored runner choices. There is no data migration or automatic upgrade. Release pipeline and platform qualification work remain separate prerequisites for later defaults. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel agents. The exact serving snapshot and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4265cb3a2b |
fix(ci): cache native server integration builds in release verification (#15619)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Release verification must run the same server integration coverage as PR verification. > - Three server suites use real Rust Runner binaries. > - PR checks already run them with the shared Rust dependency cache, but release checks cold-build them inside ordinary server test shards. > - A cold Dot Runner build can consume its entire setup deadline before any test runs. > - This pull request gives release verification a required cached native integration lane and preserves every test. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** On master commit `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`, [Cloud readiness run 37837810707](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37837810707) failed in server shard 7. Dot Runner's `cargo build --release` exceeded its 300-second child-process deadline. The other 1,640 tests in that shard passed. The failed setup then tried to remove an undefined temporary path and emitted a second error. Cargo output was captured as an opaque buffer, which obscured build progress. **What did you expect to happen?** Build fixture binaries before tests in a lane with the existing Rust dependency cache. Run all native integration tests and make their result required for release readiness. A setup failure should keep its original diagnostic. **Steps to reproduce** Run release verification on a clean runner. The existing `general-server-without-chat` group retains the three Cargo-backed suites outside the PR workflow. The Dot suite can time out during a cold release build. Run the new workflow and partition tests against the previous source to reproduce five routing and coverage failures deterministically. **Version / commit** Observed at `1881894973a2b25838d8abed9bd8aeebc3af4441`; this change is based on `ed6abbf158b`. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions Release and Cloud readiness verification. No application runtime or deployment action changes. Related work: #15581 also edits Dot integration tests for onboarding behavior. It does not repair release test routing. Searches found no open PR for this failure. ## What Changed - Add an explicit server test group that excludes the dedicated chat and native suites. Preserve the existing PR and local test groups. - Run all three native server suites in one required matrix lane with the existing trusted Rust dependency cache. - Build debug and release fixture binaries in a visible step with a 10-minute limit before tests start. Keep Cargo freshness checks and the existing test deadlines. - Stream Cargo diagnostics and clean up safely when Dot setup stops before creating its temporary directory. - Test complete, non-overlapping partitions for Release, Cloud readiness, other callers, and existing PR/local groups. Check cache restrictions, build order, and the source verification dependency. ## Verification - Passed 44 workflow and partition tests: `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`. - The same tests fail in five relevant cases against the previous workflow and selector. They pass after this correction. - An independent review repeated all 44 tests successfully. - Passed `actionlint .github/workflows/release-verify.yml`, `git diff --check`, and a secret scan. - Passed all 381 workflow policy tests: `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'`. - Passed full `pnpm build` in a clean worktree. - Built debug and release fixture binaries, then passed all 32 tests in the three real native integration suites: `pnpm test:run:general -- --group general-server-native-runner` (49.5 seconds, no skips). - Passed full `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Injected a synthetic Cargo setup failure. The suite reports that failure without the secondary undefined-path cleanup error. - Exact-head CI completed: 53 successful checks, including all server shards, both native Runner lanes, build, typecheck, browser tests, and the canary dry run. Two optional Storybook checks were skipped. - Started the duplicate local `pnpm test:run` aggregate and stopped it after exact-head CI passed. No completed local aggregate result is claimed. All test processes owned by that run exited. - Greptile scored the final head `ffe5ab5a28af2dfea9db1c1952c652f070bf52f8` at 5/5 with no review threads. - `Superagent Supply Chain Scan` is neutral, not passed: it only supports exact dependency pin replacements and cannot verify structural edits to `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`. It reported no annotations. Independent source review, Greptile, actionlint, and the workflow policy tests cover this structural change. - GitHub still requires a code-owner review for the workflow files. There are no merge conflicts. ## Risks - Adds one CI matrix job, which increases concurrent runner demand. The existing cache writer and trust restrictions stay in place. - Missing dependencies still compile from the lockfile. A build that exceeds its step limit fails visibly; failed tests still block source verification. - Workflow execution uses the new lane after merge. PR tests validate the workflow contract and run the existing native test lane. - The supply chain scanner cannot analyze this workflow structure. Its neutral result is an explicit coverage limit; it is not counted as a successful scan. - No runtime, schema, deployment, publication, credential, or test-timeout changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and independent agent review. The exact deployed model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d0f69670db |
fix(runner): recover saved execution prompts after upgrades (#15518)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Native runs save an immutable execution context for restart recovery. > - The context includes the prompt text, revision, and content hashes. > - The parser required that saved prompt to match the current release. > - A server upgrade could reject a valid saved run before provider recovery. > - This pull request validates and preserves the saved prompt snapshot. > - Routine prompt changes no longer need a catalog of past strings. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A hot restart selected a dead native runner for same-run recovery. Reading its saved v5 execution input failed with `input.runtimeContext.prompt must match the fixed Paperclip prompt revision`. The new controller accepted only v6. **Expected behavior** Recovery uses the saved prompt and validates its content hashes. It preserves the same run and provider session without starting a duplicate turn. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start a native run and save its execution input and provider checkpoint. 2. Change the fixed execution prompt in the server release. 3. Stop the runner and recover the saved run with the new controller. 4. Observe that the old parser rejects the saved prompt before provider recovery. **Paperclip version or commit** The v5-to-v6 prompt change was introduced in #15446. The defect also reproduces on current master before this fix. **Deployment mode** Source-built server with the native runner. Related work: #15446 added task-monitor guidance. The held prompt-size experiment in #15489 changes prompt wording but does not add recovery compatibility. ## What Changed - Read the prompt text and revision from the saved execution snapshot. - Treat the revision as non-empty metadata and preserve the exact saved bytes. - Validate the prompt SHA-256 and the aggregate context digest. - Keep fresh-run builders on the current prompt constants. - Test arbitrary saved prompts, malformed fields, altered text, stale hashes, and aggregate drift. - Test recovery parsing for Codex input versions v3-v5 and OpenCode, ACPX Pi, and Dot v6 inputs. - Extend the real-process restart suite with both the incident's v5 wire fixture and a prompt unknown to this release. - Run the restart recovery suite in the existing Rust-equipped PR lane, where its runner and fake-provider binaries are built. Verify complete, non-overlapping test coverage for PR, release, and local callers. - Document recovery from saved snapshots without a historical prompt catalog. ## Verification - Red: the new contract regressions fail against the catalog-based parser with the original prompt-validation error. - Green: 53 focused contract and materialization tests pass. - Red: the real-process unknown-prompt regression fails with master's original parser at the saved-input recovery read after process loss. - Green: all 15 real-process restart tests pass locally on the final branch. The saved-prompt cases keep the run and provider session, replace the PID, and record one `turn/start`. - Local repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed after rebase on `89f09dad723766e5351953f0731b9aa5daada28d`. The 53 focused tests also passed on that head. - Red: the new test-roster checks fail against the old CI placement. - Green: all 26 test-scheduling checks pass after moving the restart suite. - CI ran all 15 restart recovery tests with no skips on final head `6719fc2bb7a31a0f72ea04c7e525a63dcc6f9105`. [Runner test job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37764782334/job/113271464966). - Greptile scored 5/5 on that exact head with no actionable findings. - The complete CI matrix passed on final head `6719fc2bb7a31a0f72ea04c7e525a63dcc6f9105`: general/workspace tests, serialized server suites, both runner Vitest lanes, Rust and static checks, all browser shards, typecheck, build, and the canary dry run. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37764782334). - There are no unresolved review threads or merge conflicts. - Reproduce focused tests with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/contracts/runtime-context.test.ts src/contracts/native-execution.test.ts src/drivers/runtime-context-materializer.test.ts`. - Reproduce restart tests with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:rust` followed by `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/native-runtime/native-runner-restart-recovery.integration.test.ts`. They use temporary PostgreSQL, real runner processes, and a fake Codex provider. They do not use paid inference. ## Risks - The parser now accepts internally consistent saved prompt text that is absent from the current source. Inputs must come from trusted server persistence. Content hashes verify consistency; they do not authenticate authorship. - Existing execution-schema, ownership, checkpoint, provider, permission, and session-compatibility checks still apply. - This change validates the saved base prompt. It does not make all additional code-generated instruction strings versioned. - The process-level recovery proof uses Codex. Other provider coverage verifies the shared input parser and retained provider configuration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository inspection, code editing, and test tools. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
fc6304dfe5 |
feat(runner): add experimental OpenAI Dot provider over MCP Events (#15402)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents, tasks, permissions, and execution budgets. > - Paperclip Runner gives each provider the same admitted task and tool authority. > - OpenAI Dot runs outside the local process tree and needs asynchronous work delivery. > - The merged MCP gateway supplies OAuth consent and signed event delivery. > - A personal assistant grant cannot safely stand in for an assigned agent. > - This pull request adds a separate Dot agent connection and a durable Rust Runner bridge. > - The operator can assign work to Dot and inspect its accepted work, tool receipts, and result. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Agent or provider** OpenAI Dot, as an experimental provider of the existing Paperclip Runner adapter. **Why this adapter is useful** An operator can assign normal Paperclip tasks to an existing Dot. Dot can read its mailbox, request work on an assigned task, use admitted task tools, and submit a result. Paperclip keeps company scope, checkout, approvals, known budget limits, and activity attribution. **How the agent is invoked** A dedicated `/mcp/runner` OAuth resource pairs one Dot grant with one agent. A signed MCP mailbox event wakes Dot. Dot explicitly accepts the assignment. The Rust Runner owns the durable turn and operation receipts. The first release supports self-hosted instances with a local Runner controller. **Additional context** This extends the merged public MCP gateway from #14846 and the assistant invitation and device-consent work from #14933. This also integrates the merged assistant tool and configuration expansion in #15380. Dot retains its dedicated agent resource and cannot receive personal configuration permission. The public assistant connection remains a personal connection. ## What Changed - Add a durable Rust Dot provider and its TypeScript Runner driver. - Add closed PRP v3 external-provider operations and native execution input v6. - Add company-scoped pairing, mailbox, assignment, and operation records. - Reuse merged browser/device consent, client metadata verification, webhook admissions, refresh, secret rotation, and warm-standby gates. - Keep Dot scopes, issuer, grants, event workers, and tool access separate from personal assistant access. - Add Dot configuration, pairing, readiness, and consent UI. Keep agent grants out of the personal Connections entry. - Regenerate the Dot-only migration after master. Preserve published gateway migrations. Make the new migration safe to reapply. - Document setup, recovery, accounting limits, evidence, and remaining account qualification. - Reverify reconnect callbacks and wake outstanding work with a fresh mailbox reference; preserve the existing assignment and operation receipts. - Clean up Dot bindings and waiting runs on OAuth revoke and refresh-token replay. Old grants cannot revoke replacement bindings. - Restore the pairing reference when an unsaved agent form is reopened; document board-only pairing routes in OpenAPI. - Accept a clean Rust exit after the acknowledged shutdown receipt. Unexpected exits still require recovery. - Clear the cached binding after a successful revoke so a failed connection refresh cannot restore it. - Add production-component Storybook states and screenshots for pairing and connection review. All preview account data is synthetic. - Persist normalized completion, serialize Dot turns and durable work admission, and poll subscription readiness. - Serialize mailbox writes and cursor reads; retain paused fence acknowledgement without task authority. - Authorize admitted review runs without changing the worker assignee. Include the fenced assignment ID in production stop notices. ## Verification - This PR integrates master `4a8178e9c`. Dot migration `0317_messy_famine.sql` follows the published history and is safe to reapply. The merge preserves the reserved migration connection, batch-commit handling, private task checks, task monitors, and native accounting. - Local workspace typecheck, full build, and UI token gates pass. The server typecheck passes after the review fixes. Database and native executor regressions pass. - All twelve real Rust/PostgreSQL Dot integration tests and twelve Dot driver tests pass. The tests cover native document writing and finalization, durable replay, queue admission, mailbox ordering, admitted reviews, stale authority, production stop references, and paused acknowledgements. - Current head `d0e7e0626` passes all 57 checks: 53 pass and four are intentionally skipped. This includes full typecheck, build, tests, Rust Runner verification, browser E2E, release verification, and Canary Dry Run. Greptile rates this exact head 5/5. All review threads are resolved. - The full local root test run is slower than the sharded CI run and has not completed. The full CI test gates pass on the current commit. Focused local regressions pass. - Real-account pairing and event delivery on this base commit remain unqualified. Live account and setup proof are recorded in the follow-up #15414. The following screenshots use synthetic preview data. They show the production pairing component and do not qualify a real account or the full agent setup journey.   ## Risks - This base adapter uses `PAPERCLIP_ENABLE_OPENAI_DOT=1` plus Public MCP and Paperclip Runner. The separate experimental-settings follow-up in #15414 replaces this environment flag with saved operator settings. - Dot does not expose provider token usage or cost. The operator must acknowledge external billing. Known Paperclip budget gates still apply. - Cancellation fences Paperclip authority. It does not confirm that Dot stopped all external activity. - Assigned skill files and third-party MCP bindings are unsupported and reject admission. There is no mounted workspace, model selector, or provider thread identifier. - Hosted agent-broker and remote controller deployments are not qualified. - The new migration follows the merged master history. Existing prototype databases still need the normal master migration history before this Dot-only migration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact deployment ID and context window size are not exposed in this session. Capabilities used: reasoning, repository editing, code execution, and test inspection. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #123` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a6306ba606 |
feat(runner): consolidate Cursor production integration (#15075)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native Runner keeps provider sessions under company authority, approvals, budgets and durable recovery. > - Cursor work was spread across candidate branches. The published branch lacked later plan, permission and cleanup fixes. > - Production also needs public installation and matching runtime assets for local and Daytona execution. > - This pull request consolidates Cursor onto current mainline recovery behavior and completes that installation path. > - The installed v11 release passed focused local and Daytona qualification after the generic mode and lifecycle cleanup. The later model-selection correction and current mainline merge produce v14 artifacts that need matching release qualification. > - Cursor admission is enabled in source; publish only an artifact combination with matching qualification. Native AskQuestion and complete per-run dollar accounting remain excluded. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #14435, #14631, #14669, #14699, #14724. This completes the Cursor implementation by @cryppadotta from combined source `22c78242a4e0c2369fecf0c2dc4e7600fbad6706`. It preserves newer mainline recovery, completion and warm-directory behavior. Pi and Copilot remain gated. ## What Changed - Generate named Rust and TypeScript ACPX release profiles from one manifest. Share runtime pins with packaging and server verification. Preserve vendor runtime versions; bind the updated ACPX patch to Cursor profile v14 and reject stale generated declarations at build/typecheck. - Remove ACPX model allowlists, including the former Codex and Pi restrictions and the duplicate developer test-drive gate. Send any explicit model ID unchanged to its provider and verify the effective selection before prompting. The bundled ACPX package forwards unlisted IDs, rejects mismatched acknowledgements, and restores the exact selection after session load. It does not expand Cursor model aliases. Provider rejection, mismatch, or missing model controls fails without a fallback. Model examples live in evaluation fixtures, outside runtime declarations. - Add pinned Cursor execution, contained instructions, exact model verification and Agent/Plan/Ask modes. - Carry an opaque generic `mode` identifier in shared native execution, sidecar, Rust and recovery contracts. The provider adapter owns supported modes, defaults, native translation and acknowledgement. - Keep native RPC recognition, accepted-plan interpretation and permission evidence behind provider adapters. Shared settlement and recovery verify normalized facts and their committed evidence. - Replace the Cursor-only warm-attachment branch with a runner-owned capability. Only Cursor opts into it. Move profile compatibility and optional usage parsing into provider metadata and adapters. - Write generic plan-wait receipts. Read exact historical Cursor receipts through a separate compatibility decoder. Reject mixed formats and preserve existing authority checks. - Carry native plans, semantic questions, todos, child activity, permission identities and partial usage diagnostics through the Runner. - Preserve durable response delivery, cancellation, warm ownership and process retirement. - Finish accepted planning runs successfully. Keep their tasks open for explicit direction. Acceptance does not start implementation. - Ship `paperclipai runtime setup cursor` and its provisioner through the public package. npm installation does not download Cursor. Setup uses the OS account's closure-keyed cache so system-wide npm packages can remain read-only. Run it as the Paperclip service account. - Include Cursor in normal provider packs and Daytona images for macOS ARM64/x64 and Linux x64. - Reject stale release packs by source revision and current ACPX/Cursor pins before assembly writes files. Verify current Cursor version/profile/closure again at runtime. - Ship all three daemon targets and the expected Linux image-pack identity. A macOS controller uses its packaged Linux daemon for Daytona. Image mismatches fail before provider launch. - Use the vendored Runner boundary for installed readiness probes. Verify the actual installed Cursor probe. - Verify compiled public Daytona plugins and their release versions in installed smokes. - Record exact artifacts, the acceptance matrix, retained failures, supported capabilities and rollback behavior in the [readiness report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/codex/cursor-production-readiness/doc/plans/2026-10-03-cursor-production-readiness.md). ## Verification - Current head `f7ec5cc1f0e30c62a829c016ff2013a2a9d79037` merges mainline `faa8e452c73bae5e044dd6379179a00106abb131`. It keeps Cursor plan and cancellation guards alongside mainline historical-question filtering. The evaluation catalog includes both Cursor and expanded adapter accounting cases (683 total). Recursive typecheck, full build, 696 lifecycle/recovery tests, 45 fixture tests and fixture typecheck passed. Current-head CI passed: 56 successful checks, one neutral and four skipped. [Complete CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37557996535). The fresh Base Greptile review is 5/5 on this exact head, with 304 files reviewed, zero new comments and zero unresolved threads. The user authorized overriding the CODEOWNER review gate after checks passed; no failing checks are overridden. Prior results below retain their own head identities. - Corrective head `3d2b168366258036f6b6a6fccb382c49138cc601` fixes the post-merge Apex finding. Automatic-review and new-evidence reconciliation preserve pending child results and recheck delivery under the status lock before completing. Account repair now excludes unrelated secret consumers and requires the failed agent's identity. Regression coverage includes the commit race, delivery statuses, current-run/current-intent exclusions, repeated reconciliation, both database reconciliation paths, and credential consumer boundaries. All 184 affected tests, server typecheck and server build passed. Current-head Base Greptile review is 5/5, with 304 files reviewed, zero new comments and zero unresolved threads. Current-head CI passed: 56 successful checks, one neutral and four skipped. [Complete CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37535994724). This Base review is distinct from the earlier Apex review. - Merge head `5957c257a` reconciles mainline `b508a05c4`. It preserves both accepted-plan waits and pending-child-completion checks, current provider selectors, task-creation response identities, and mainline ACPX missing-file handling. The combined patch is bound to Cursor profile v14; historical records keep their original identities. - Merge head `5957c257a` passed recursive typecheck, full build, 43 installed ACPX/package contracts, 107 provider UI and plan/recovery tests, 593 database-backed lifecycle tests, 49 profile/native contract tests, 45 Product E2E fixture tests, fixture typecheck, token gates, three provider-free browser task-creation cases, and Runner conformance/replay checks. Its complete CI passed (55 successful checks, one neutral and four skipped), while Apex returned 2/5 with a child-delivery finding addressed below. - The local full-suite attempt again failed the unchanged Git streaming test (360-second timeout) and was stopped. The concurrent local Rust attempt failed four unchanged Codex process/deadline tests; all four passed serially without code changes in 7.29 seconds after removing the competing test load. These failed commands are retained and are not reported as full-suite passes; the fresh Linux CI runs are tracked separately. - The previous head `907bdb2a2778c7ffeb4a662a91460c9d1ddfc9c5` earned Apex 5/5 with zero comments after fixing all three findings: per-user install cache, stale release-pack rejection, and public Linux smoke account/home handling. Its real built installer passed from read-only public packages on macOS ARM64 and Linux x64. All 137 release-registry checks and 64 ACPX package contracts passed. That review does not cover this mainline reconciliation. - Prior `beadd3654` passed the full CI matrix; its one unchanged chat test failure and successful single retry remain in the [CI history](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37521449327). Historical results below remain attributed to their original builds. - Fixture follow-up `dd59d7e82b103a88b7cbd7d2c38b612c0fbbff7a` removes provider-specific model choices from generic offline ACPX tests. The fake sidecar preserves the model and session identity selected at open through suspension. Affected verification passed: 106 Rust tests and 73 TypeScript tests. This commit changes test code only; the production-code checks below retain their recorded identities. Its CI and Greptile review later passed; those results belong to that historical head. - Model-selection cleanup `9a070808b48960a41fdfd369ae0636b95af82459`: 252 focused Runner tests passed (six platform skips), covering all six ACPX agents, native model acknowledgement, rejected selections, installation integrity and recovery identity. The merged branch passed recursive typecheck, full build, token gates, server admission (19 tests), and the Product E2E catalog (45 tests). The acceptance catalog passed all four tests. The full Rust suite passed: 643 tests, 2 ignored. It verifies sidecar acknowledgement of unlisted models and rejection of model mismatches. The final commits only update Rust tests; production sources match the verified build at `65ec3279ac50185e3cda109b5cfd9b4f56105de0`. No new paid provider calls were made. - The merge preserves both Cursor and the new mainline public-MCP fixture cases. Auto-merge remains disabled; the latest follow-up status is recorded above. The local `pnpm test:run` attempt hit the unchanged Git streaming test's 300-second timeout and was interrupted before merging mainline. The broad Runner attempt found obsolete single-model assertions plus three macOS fixture-path failures caused by a `/private/tmp` override. The assertions are corrected; affected TypeScript checks passed with the standard macOS temporary directory, and the complete Rust suite passed. Neither interrupted command is a full-suite pass. - Earlier declaration-cleanup head `6f4a5e9e2` passed recursive typecheck, build, Rust and focused tests. Its CI later exposed a test expecting duplicated Grok digest literals. The current source fixes that assertion to compare launcher bytes with the shared manifest. Historical successes and failed attempts are retained; no new live provider qualification is claimed. - Previous head `e75fde6098b0ddd8cec765bfb6ecaeecb88a26a6` passed complete CI (56 successful checks, one neutral, four skipped) and Greptile 5/5. [Historical complete CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/37489112305). Those results are not claimed for the cleanup head. - Frozen live application: `d7b696f9b8f79095233e9e3d56d23e6a6018dd48`. Public package version: `0.0.0-cursor-verify.3d0c9b7761c6`. The declaration cleanup preserves release pins and does not relabel that tested artifact as a build of the new source. Mainline through `e34abee670` was reconciled while preserving accepted-plan waits, provider-capacity handling, and both Cursor and public-MCP fixtures. - Clean normal installation, explicit Cursor setup and daemon resolution passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta, and Linux x64. npm lifecycle hooks ran without silently downloading Cursor. - Historical v11 live matrix: **18/18 passed with cleanup** (nine local, nine Daytona) after the generic mode and lifecycle cleanup. The campaign has 23 attempts; all five failures and their diagnoses remain recorded. Exact case identities, hashes and limits are in the readiness report. All provider calls are real, use the explicit Luna model and company-bound credentials, and run without qualification or runtime-asset overrides. - The immutable Daytona image is `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:d6259b6bba094702c13fc2283bd85550849c1c53145b656fb2746778f9fa1747`. The public Daytona plugin is installed independently and its version is checked. - Recursive typecheck, full build, token gates and Runner contract/conformance/replay checks passed on the frozen application. Its complete Linux CI suite passed. The duplicate local full-suite command was incomplete after timing failures; affected repeats passed, but that command is not reported as a clean pass. - Qualification fixtures passed typecheck, 1,675 Vitest tests (one skip), 128 Node checks, three provider-free browser tests, and 150 focused lifecycle tests after the final diagnostic correction. The affected legacy Cursor command file also passed all five tests after removing its shorter 10-second override; it now inherits the suite’s standard 15-second timeout. Greptile is 5/5 on `e75fde609` with no unresolved review threads. CI results above are recorded separately from historical build results. ## Risks - Cursor v14 includes the updated ACPX dependency patch and release identity. The v11 live matrix and image below remain historical evidence. They do not certify new v14 package/image artifacts. - ACPX accepts models beyond the qualification fixtures. Availability and entitlement depend on the provider. Successful configuration is not a claim of live qualification for every model. - Shared mode is an opaque identifier. Provider adapters own its meaning. Incompatible historical sessions remain fenced; exact committed plan waits and task history remain inspectable. - Native AskQuestion is excluded. Paperclip semantic questions are supported. Authoritative per-run dollar accounting is unavailable; partial counters remain diagnostics and unknown cost is not zero. - Image input, detailed native diffs, deeper child transcripts and native plan-file export remain follow-ups. - macOS x64 has clean-install and daemon-startup proof under Rosetta, not a separate live campaign on Intel hardware. - Release only the tested package/image combination. Merging this PR does not publish npm packages or deploy that image. Later builds need their own release verification. Rollback disables new Cursor admission while preserving records and recovery inspection. - A model can fail an exact instruction: one cancelled-plan attempt returned the wrong summary marker despite correct cancellation. The unchanged repeat passed; both results remain in the report. > ROADMAP.md was checked. This completes existing native Runner/Cursor work; it does not add an independent core feature proposal. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact serving variant and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, protocol tests and browser-backed Product E2E tools. Cursor acceptance uses the explicit `gpt-5.6-luna[context=272k,reasoning=medium,fast=false]` model. That is the evaluated provider model. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass — affected suites passed; full CI and the retained local failed attempts are recorded separately above. - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green — 56 successful checks, one neutral and four skipped on `f7ec5cc1f0e30c62a829c016ff2013a2a9d79037` - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — fresh Base review passed on `f7ec5cc1f0e30c62a829c016ff2013a2a9d79037`; zero new comments and no unresolved threads. The earlier Apex finding remains fixed. - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
3ebd7bc0c9 |
test: isolate accounting fixtures and include all adapter suites (#14989)
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6eaf218924 |
chore: grant Storybook publishing access through CODEOWNERS (#14984)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Storybook previews help contributors review the board UI. > - The publishing workflow uses the default branch CODEOWNERS file to authorize users. > - Tonio and Scott need access to this workflow. > - This pull request adds both accounts as release documentation owners. > - The existing workflow can then authorize both accounts without a separate user list in code. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Access to the Storybook build and publishing workflow. **Subsystem affected** Repository ownership and GitHub Actions authorization. **Current behavior** The workflow reads individual accounts from every CODEOWNERS rule on the default branch. Neither `tonio-alucema` nor `scotttong` is in that file. Both accounts already have repository admin access, but the workflow authorization check denies them. **Proposed behavior** Add both accounts to the `doc/RELEASING.md` ownership rule. After merge, both can start and rerun Storybook publishing workflows. A configured `storybook-deploy` environment reviewer must still approve deployment. CODEOWNERS membership does not add an account to the environment reviewer settings. **Reason and benefit** Contributors can publish UI previews through the same CODEOWNERS policy as other maintainers. The authorization code has no account-specific exceptions. **Breaking changes** None. The existing authorization and deployment approval checks remain in place. **Additional context** Related changes: #13226 added the publishing workflow. #13231 added stable branch bookmarks. A search found no open PR for these permission changes. ## What Changed - Add `@tonio-alucema` and `@scotttong` only to the release documentation ownership rule. - Test that accounts listed for release documentation can start and rerun publishing workflows. - Test that removing an account from CODEOWNERS removes its publishing access. - Explain how CODEOWNERS entries and environment reviewers affect publishing access. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/storybook-deploy.test.mjs`: all 25 tests pass. - `actionlint .github/workflows/storybook-deploy.yml .github/workflows/storybook-visual.yml`: passes. - `git diff --check`: passes. - GitHub API checks confirm that both accounts have repository admin access. The deployment environment requires an existing reviewer and disables administrator bypass. - Repository-wide typecheck, tests, and build were attempted. They cannot complete in this worktree because workspace dependencies are not installed. Typecheck cannot find Node type definitions. Tests and build cannot load the workspace `tsx` package. - After merge, run `Storybook Deploy` from `master`, select a source branch, obtain environment approval, and check the published URLs in the run summary. ## Risks Both accounts gain permission to start and rerun Storybook publishing. Deployment still needs approval from a configured environment reviewer. No AWS permissions or live GitHub settings change in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The exact backend model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. The agent used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, shell execution, and GitHub API tools. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
6f2ce27ca7 |
fix(workspaces): prepare checkouts without a local seed config (#14810)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task preparation can create an isolated Git worktree and run its setup script. > - The Paperclip repository setup script also prepares a seeded development instance. > - A server configured through environment variables can have no local seed config. > - This stops ordinary task preparation before the agent starts. > - This pull request prepares checkout dependencies when no seed source exists, while preserving errors for invalid sources and existing development instances. > - Tasks can start without creating or claiming a seeded development runtime. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A task with the Paperclip repository fails during setup when the host has no repository-local or default instance config. The automatic worktree provisioner requires a seed source even when the task only needs the checkout. **Expected behavior** A plain checkout should prepare its dependencies without a local development database. A missing custom source, invalid source path, or existing development instance with a missing source should still fail. Starting a seeded runtime must still require a valid source. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run an environment-configured Paperclip server without a local instance config. 2. Add the Paperclip repository to a project. 3. Start a task that uses an isolated Git worktree without a custom provision command. 4. Observe the setup error before agent execution. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced against `0d3e7bf6ac` with a real script subprocess and workspace realization regression. **Deployment mode** Environment-configured server with external PostgreSQL. **Additional context** Searched open and closed GitHub PRs and issues. Related work: Refs #14795 (seed-source diagnostics) and Refs #11733 (source validation). This change keeps source validation and seed-readiness checks in place. ## What Changed - Permit dependency setup when the default seed config is absent (including the Docker image config path) and the worktree has no development-instance state. - Keep missing custom configs, invalid paths, and lost sources for existing instances as errors. - Create no config, environment file, or seed manifest for a plain checkout. - Keep dependency install failures visible and allow normal instance setup once a source becomes available. - Cover the setup script, seed-runtime refusal, and automatic server worktree realization. - Document the difference between checkout preparation and seeded-runtime readiness. ## Verification - Regression tests failed before the fix for absent-source checkout preparation and dependency setup. - `bash -n scripts/provision-worktree.sh` - `node --test scripts/__tests__/provision-worktree-self-heal.test.mjs` — 34 passed; 1 existing flock-dependent test skipped on macOS. - Server regression — 2 passed, covering an unset config and the Docker image default path. - `pnpm build` — passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - All CI checks passed, including the full test shards, build, typecheck, browser tests, and canary dry run. - The first local `pnpm test:run` encountered two chat-test failures because skill discovery selected an unrelated parent directory. Both tests pass at the PR commit in a clean temporary checkout. The full local run was not completed; the redundant clean run was stopped after the complete CI suite passed. - `git diff --check` and added-line secrets/PII scan passed. - Greptile: 5/5, no comments. The branch has no merge conflicts. - No live tenant deployment or task retry was performed. ## Risks - A new checkout with no implicit seed config now completes dependency setup. It has no seeded development instance. A runtime request still fails until a valid source exists. - Existing instances and custom source paths retain their failure behavior. The script does not synthesize a source from environment credentials or copy a live database. - No schema, API, or task-setting changes. Revert the commit to restore the previous setup behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex (GPT-6), with tool-assisted analysis, code edits, and local tests. The runtime did not expose a verified model variant or context-window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
0dc8d80eea |
Clarify worktree seed source setup failures (#14795)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Managed worktrees can prepare an isolated Paperclip development instance. > - The built-in provisioner requires a canonical registered seed source config. > - A missing source currently has the same message as a rejected symlink or non-regular file. > - This pull request separates those messages and names the supported setup choices. > - Operators can choose the intended setup without changing the source-validation guards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A plain repository checkout can select the control-plane instance as its seed source. If that instance runs with environment-only configuration, the source config file can be unavailable. The provisioner stops with a message that also covers noncanonical files and gives no repair guidance. **Expected behavior** The error should identify the selected source and distinguish an unavailable prerequisite from a rejected file. It should explain that a seeded development instance needs a canonical registered source. It should describe the explicit no-op only for a checkout-only worktree. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a plain base checkout with no repository-local config. 2. Leave the control-plane instance config file absent. 3. Run the built-in worktree provisioner against an isolated checkout. **Paperclip version or commit** Base commit `c8f874311c`. **Deployment mode** Managed local worktrees, including servers configured only through environment variables. Related: #11733 adds deeper source-readiness checks. #11735 changes runtime and seed lifecycle handling. This change only improves the existing shell guard's diagnostics. ## What Changed - Distinguish unavailable source configs from symlinks and non-regular files. - Identify whether the selected source belongs to the base workspace or control-plane instance. - Explain seeded-instance prerequisites and the explicit checkout-only setup choice. - Verify failure still precedes target-state creation and CLI invocation. - Document the setup choice and its runtime-readiness limit. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/provision-worktree-self-heal.test.mjs`: 21 passed; one platform-gated test skipped because macOS lacks `flock`. - `bash -n scripts/provision-worktree.sh` and `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/ai-connections.test.ts`: 50 passed after running the installed PostgreSQL package's own symlink hydration script in this worktree. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted, then stopped after unrelated database suites failed at startup. The offline install had omitted PostgreSQL native library symlinks. The focused database rerun above verifies the local repair; the complete suite is delegated to CI. - `pnpm build`: passed. - [Required PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36797650741) passed on `0a3ba63e12`: 50 successful checks and two intentional Storybook skips. Greptile scored that exact commit 5/5; there are zero unresolved review threads and no merge conflicts. ## Risks - Diagnostics only. This does not supply a source config or repair an existing blocked task. - The failure predicates and exit status stay unchanged. Symlink and non-regular-file errors do not recommend skipping setup. - The checkout-only no-op requires an explicit policy choice. It does not grant runtime or seed readiness. - No schema, migration, tenant policy, deployment, or Sentry reporting change. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
18e8c121d9 |
fix(runner): include Grok support in public installs with sandbox prerequisites (#14024)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents through a shared native runner. > - Built-in harness support should ship with Paperclip's public distribution. > - Grok already speaks ACP; it does not require a new public bridge package. > - Sandbox provisioning owns the native executable and its pinned version. > - The runner must verify that prerequisite without downloading it during npm installation. > - This change separates built-in launcher identity from external runtime identity. > - Clean npm installation and live staging checks verify the distribution boundary. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13882, #13973, #13977, #13979. This follow-up now targets master after #13882 was squash-merged. It replaces the private `@paperclipai/grok-acp` workspace package with runner-owned assets. Current master is included so the branch also contains the merged scheduler, complete-event capture, and durable cleanup fixes. ## What Changed - Ship Grok launcher and qualification metadata inside the runner's compiled output and the public server's vendored runner tree. - Remove the separate Grok npm package and all package-manager install hooks for this runtime. - Require the checksum-verified Grok Build 1.0.13 binary at `/opt/paperclip/providers/grok/1.0.13/grok` in the selected execution environment. Provision it explicitly in the Daytona image and CI setup. - Keep native binaries outside the provider pack. Bind the built-in launcher into the pack manifest. - Preserve executable leases, descriptor-backed startup, credential fences, permissions, and exact ACP model admission. - Use `builtin:grok-acp` and `native:grok` as profile identities. Historical package-profile sessions fail closed on resume rather than being silently reinterpreted. - Resolve built-in assets from the authenticated sidecar location, including public server npm layouts. Keep the controller path out of provider environments. - Add clean npm tarball installation verification to the existing trusted canary CI job and the admitted manual EC2 verification path. It stages a unified release version and runs npm lifecycle scripts, then verifies missing-prerequisite rejection and admission after separate provisioning without credentials or inference. - Include the controller-owned provider pack in stamped Cloud images. Unstamped local images omit the pack and remain usable; remote ACPX requires full source provenance. - Correct CLI approval-page metadata for an already authenticated Cloud board user; approval authorization remains unchanged. - Honor explicit native-runner enablement in the Cloud agent picker and direct setup page, keeping the flag disabled by default. - Allow selecting the execution environment before connecting credentials. Include Grok in the existing authenticated hello-probe flow, targeting its pinned native prerequisite for runner setup. - Recover an existing subscription sign-in conflict through an explicit cancel-and-retry action, serialized after cancellation succeeds. - Preserve the selected ACPX harness before normalizing config fields, so new Grok agents use the Grok default model. - Keep the credential-free Cloud provider pack root-owned and readable after runtime UID remapping; verify manifest and referenced asset access under an unrelated unprivileged UID during image builds. - Archive prior failover backups alongside explicitly replaced harness state, preserving evidence while preventing stale backups from blocking a fresh replacement. - Update Daytona image content inputs and contract tests for the built-in assets and explicit provisioner. - Document and regression-test the shared `approve-all` default for Grok setup, saved configuration, and native execution. Explicitly saved restrictions remain unchanged. ## Verification Current merge-repair head `df09eb3e1a619430ad8419a0ee9aedd486689b05` incorporates master `f1a394bd30cb56fb9e479f98b9f50176fe921858` after the base PR was squash-merged. All 12 conflicts came from incoming files identical to the tested pre-squash base. The final tree exactly matches a three-way merge using that original base, preserving built-in Grok distribution and removal of the obsolete private package. All 252 focused runner/UI tests, six npm-isolation tests, and token gates pass. Fresh exact-head Greptile review is 5/5 with no outstanding findings; security scans and EC2 native compilation pass. All current-head CI is green: 56 successful checks/statuses and four intentional skips ([run 36468768035](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36468768035)). The repository owner explicitly authorized bypassing code-owner approval after all checks passed; no CI checks or repository protection settings are bypassed or changed. The only remaining PR was removed from the completed stack metadata to permit native auto-merge. Earlier integration head `78cb306ecc41b5c96577c26c1d89153b0ef865a1` includes master `3447609d2247e75e55d91493dda91a608364f672` (2026-09-28). Two master advances during verification overlapped the eval catalog; the final merge preserves Grok qualification, completion updates, and bounded API-response reading in all 348 cells. All 77 focused catalog/eval/workflow tests pass. Both native stack layers (#14397) are mergeable, and both exact-head Greptile reviews are 5/5 with successful security scans and no unresolved review threads. All current-head CI is green: 56 successful checks/statuses and four intentional skips ([CI attempts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36447124691)). The initial attempt lost two EC2 runners to shutdown signals and stalled a third shard during dependency preparation; all three passed the same-commit failed-job-only retry. Trunk code-owner requirements remain enforced. The review summary’s non-blocking saved-asset offset classification note concerns code already merged in #14301; those runtime files are identical to master and outside this stack’s diff. Historical live evidence below retains its original source revisions. [Final public npm verification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36445542764) passed on `76ea70cd4d13786a042af9df82f0fd7a8c85ae30`: 17 public packages, an executed offline lifecycle sentinel, unchanged consumer lock, built-in launcher, missing-prerequisite rejection, and verified separately provisioned binary/command lease. Provisioning and cleanup require no host privilege elevation; only the positive probe mounts the temporary native binary read-only. The verifier is unchanged by the final master merge. All six isolation tests and an offline npm smoke test pass. The prior head had 56 green CI checks and a 5/5 review after two unchanged tests timed out and passed a failed-job-only retry ([CI attempts](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36444597313)). All 56 recovery-display/lineage tests pass; re-review cleared the already-covered missed-retry concern. Earlier EC2 failures remain retained: [npm lockfile rejection](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36436311203), [missing compiler in the slim image](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36440210984), and the aggregate 15-minute test timeouts in those broad runs. Both broad attempts passed typecheck, token gates, Product E2E type/unit checks and build. The focused EC2 lane preserves the existing trusted-actor and immutable-source gates. Earlier documentation/test checkpoint `ff244c4fd78a7ede5a3e00efe09f475f133ef33e` leaves runtime behavior unchanged. 154 focused tests pass across configuration building, native provider resolution, permission policy, credentials, UI configuration, and new-agent setup (including both Grok auth modes); token gates pass. All fresh CI is green for this head: 56 successful checks/statuses and two intentional skips ([run 36367065119](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36367065119)). Greptile is 5/5 with no new findings. Grok already inherits the shared `approve-all` default, so unattended setup requires no manual permission change. Runtime head `bb5a9307991f1ac567b781970ef11b39d518e19b` fixes a final staging continuation failure before provider startup: explicit replacement archived the old harness but left its failover backups active, which caused `runner_harness_state_mismatch`. The regression fails before the fix and passes after it; all eight adjacent recovery-safety cases also pass. Old backups remain inspectable inside the continuity archive. All fresh CI is green at this head ([run 36360839248](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36360839248)), with a 5/5 review. One unrelated Cursor test timed out in the initial server shard; the same-commit failed-job rerun passed, and both attempts are retained. Staging deployment is confirmed healthy on this revision. The controller image is `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip@sha256:6ad91c487910ccd2596ff7aed0a3a3ea5233d12b51b83cd6e1402237749b9673`. The final browser-created staging task passed on this exact revision with API authentication: context read → structured human question → controller restart → answer submission → same native provider session resumed → document saved → task Done. The two turns took approximately 119s and 77s. The actual write receipt was applied, and the saved document has exactly one revision containing the selected answer and requested marker. Usage and cost were not reported. [Controller image build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36360889243). - Previous integration head `a44f7dbb6b6f77cd9ed893756ca453307f281e5f`: all CI green (53 successful checks/statuses, two intentional skips), including repository typecheck/build/tests, native Runner tests, browser shards, and canary installation checks. [CI run 36358672529](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36358672529). Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Focused checks cover Grok credentials, executable admission, launcher assets, provider-pack paths/permissions, workflow contracts, setup defaults, CLI authorization, and subscription conflict recovery. All 39 protocol definitions validate. Final integration checks pass 124 catalog/evidence/cache tests and nine project-form tests; token gates pass. Some local dependency checks could not load the stale installed dependency tree; the corresponding fresh EC2 checks pass. - Clean public npm installation passed on EC2 at `8b172ebcf8e02e30662d830c00f3961e3bd459ec` ([run 36164964900](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36164964900)): 17 unified-version packages, lifecycle scripts enabled, built-in launcher present, no separate Grok package or npm-downloaded binary, missing prerequisite rejected, separately provisioned native executable and command lease verified. No credentials or inference were used. Subsequent changes preserve this npm asset layout. - The immutable Daytona prerequisite image is `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip-daytona-runner@sha256:98957d5be0ac774d086b6402b5849e8e6356fec70fb8c09fca6eb4ed6de918e0`, built from `5a2db471f3ddabe77f9f80e76ed27f996cb97fba`. The previous Cloud controller image was `ghcr.io/paperclipai/paperclip@sha256:fd914e1ab1e45f741e8e078ff452d16f082d7ac05f9b4b3506d3a3c64150d204`, built from `a44f7dbb6b6f77cd9ed893756ca453307f281e5f`; it is superseded by the latest image above. Its EC2 build verified provider-pack access under an unrelated unprivileged UID. - Browser staging at `40f898bc4cba73c1dff4e6344a3983ba0fb247ef` passed full Grok onboarding with the correct `grok-4.7` model, saved credential delivery, and pinned Daytona execution. A browser-created task read context and asked the structured human question. After a controller restart, answering the persisted question resumed the same native provider session, saved the requested document, and completed the task. Actual tool outcomes and durable state agree: one question and one document revision. The two successful turns took 42.7s and 63.1s; usage and cost were not reported. - Restricted policy returned the expected `approval_required` outcome. Functional staging tests explicitly selected `approve-all`; controller authorization and governed approvals remain enforced. Temporary board CLI access was revoked and verified rejected (HTTP 401), and the disposable onboarding agent was paused. Failures remain retained: the pre-fix continuation failure (its task remains blocked; the passing final task is fresh), the original Cloud provider-pack permission failure, the expected restricted-policy denial, the superseded npm staging failure, and an earlier monolithic CI infrastructure timeout. Browser CI exposed a project alias/form race; the final stack uses master's stronger draft-preservation fix and all browser shards pass. Historical full subscription/API protocol and Product rosters retain their original source revisions and do not qualify this packaging revision. No local Docker or Rust build was used. ## Risks The branch includes master’s draft-preservation fix for project URL aliases. It keeps the same project’s edit form mounted and clears prior data when the project or company changes. Custom sandboxes and local execution hosts must provision the pinned binary before Grok starts. Missing, changed, unsupported-platform, and symlinked executables fail admission. The new builtin profile cannot resume sessions created with the former private-package profile. Existing Claude/Codex npm bridge profiles retain their package pins. Grok restricted modes preserve the selected policy but cannot automatically admit Paperclip calls: ACP permission metadata does not independently bind tool authority, so those calls stop with `approval_required`. New Grok configurations default to `approve-all`, including API configurations that omit the mode. Existing explicitly restricted configurations remain restricted; controller authorization and governed approvals remain enforced. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
8ee8f1fd6e |
ci: retire recurring public cloud image builds (#13827)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Core publishes standard images and source verification for downstream services. > - Managed services can now compose private images from the signed standard image. > - Core still builds a second public cloud image on every master push and release. > - That duplicate producer consumes build capacity and retains an obsolete readiness contract. > - This pull request retires recurring cloud publication while preserving the standard producer and rollback artifacts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13797 and #13789. Related: #12856 changes image dependency packaging; it does not retire this producer. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Core's recurring Docker publication and Cloud readiness workflow. **Current behavior** Master pushes call the legacy cloud publisher from Cloud readiness. Release tags and manual Docker runs call it too. Canary promotion also requires the legacy image. **Proposed behavior** Publish standard Core images and retain `Cloud source verified v1`. Let downstream services build their managed image. Keep explicit commit previews and existing images available. ## What Changed - Remove `docker-cloud.yml`, its master and release callers, and its unused cache selector. - Remove the legacy image/migrator wait and `Cloud deployable v1` job. Keep the full source verification workflow and exact source-proof name. - Make canary promotion inspect and promote the standard image only. - Preserve signed standard-image publication, direct migrator publication, and explicit `release.yml` previews. The preview path still uses the Dockerfile `cloud` target. - Update workflow, preview, build-stamp, and packaging tests. Exercise the promotion shell with mocked registry commands, including missing-image and missing-tag cases. - Document frozen legacy aliases, consumer requirements, preview compatibility, and rollback retention. ## Verification - All 377 workflow tests pass: `node --test .github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs`. - All 129 release-registry tests pass: `pnpm test:release-registry`. - Focused source-proof, standard-image, preview, and workflow tests pass: 256 tests. - Focused image packaging/build-stamp tests pass: 16 tests. - Actionlint passes on all three changed workflow files. `git diff --check` passes. - Full local `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` pass. - The policy follow-up updates an old assertion that required the removed readiness job. All 37 source-proof/release-workflow tests pass locally. - Full local `pnpm test:run` did not complete successfully while the Mac ran out of disk space. No full-suite pass is claimed. Removed 1.2 GiB of generated Cargo output from this isolated worktree with `cargo clean`. GitHub CI passed on the final head: 52 successful checks and 2 optional skips. - Fresh Greptile review for `4f5fe1951f0bd7f7739cf6655d395ff78f1ed944`: **5/5**, successful current-head check, zero review threads. - September 23 refresh: the unchanged PR head merges cleanly with current master `db8f8fe5b73a2697684a30261b0d306a9c631aba`. In an isolated temporary worktree, all 377 workflow tests and 29 release/preview tests pass on the combined tree. `git diff --cached --check` passes. - Refreshed Actionlint workflow validation passes with ShellCheck disabled. Full Actionlint reports the same 10 existing ShellCheck diagnostics as master, with no added diagnostics. No source changes or new PR commits were needed. - The full local build/typecheck and current-head Linux CI results above remain the verification for the unchanged PR head. They were not rerun for this metadata-only refresh. No image publication or tenant deployment was initiated for this refresh. ## Risks **Deployment prerequisite satisfied (September 23):** The combined cleanup release is deployed to staging and production, and production Support is verified. Active managed-fleet automation uses standard-image composition. Explicit immutable previews remain supported by the retained preview publisher. This PR is ready for maintainer review; keep auto-merge disabled and wait for explicit merge authorization. - A consumer still selecting `Cloud deployable v1` will stop advancing at the last legacy-ready commit. Confirm active automatic consumers use the standard-image composition contract before merge. - Legacy cloud release-channel aliases stop advancing. Standard self-hosted aliases continue. - This PR deletes no registry images, cache tags, migrators, credentials, or runner infrastructure. Existing immutable releases remain usable for rollback. - Explicit legacy previews remain for commit-specific operator deployments. Retiring that compatibility path requires a separate consumer migration. - These changes affect CI publication, not database schema or application behavior. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The runtime does not expose a more specific model identifier or context-window size. Used repository inspection, reasoning, code editing, shell tools, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
db8f8fe5b7 |
fix(evals): select Grok subscription protocol credentials explicitly (#13901)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work through shared runner contracts. > - Direct protocol evals qualify provider behavior against a mock control plane. > - Grok supports API keys and company subscription credentials. > - The hosted protocol workflow selected an API key for every Grok cell. > - Product subscription support did not enable subscription protocol runs. > - This change adds explicit subscription selection and checks the recorded authentication mode. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13878, #13882, #12618. The direct Grok protocol roster cannot run with subscription authentication through the trusted default-branch workflow. Add an explicit selector while keeping API-key dispatches compatible. Keep the actor allowlist, protected environment, immutable source revisions, and publication gates. ## What Changed - Add `grok_authentication` with `api_key` and `subscription` choices. Keep `api_key` as the compatibility default. - Deliver the protected `GROK_AUTH_JSON` secret only to a subscription-selected Grok cell. Do not provide an API key to that cell. - Read authentication mode from the pinned eval program's actual roster summary. Retain it in the cell, catalog, campaign roster, and result. - Reject missing or mismatched authentication evidence during aggregation. Preserve cell metadata and an allowlisted failure reason before failing a cell, so malformed evidence cannot hide the retained attempt. - Document credential setup, source separation, and temporary-secret cleanup. ## Verification - `node --test packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/runner-protocol-eval-campaign.test.mjs packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/runner-protocol-eval-workflow-security.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: 34 tests passed. - Validated all 39 Grok cells at eval revision `3213dbec7e8ca1865ea95e6db7e7d34b095eb47a`; every selected cell requests only the subscription credential. Validation made zero provider calls. - Negative coverage rejects invalid selectors and missing or API authentication evidence in an otherwise passing subscription attempt. - `git diff --check` passed. All 53 current-head checks passed; the unchanged callback-drain timing test passed its bounded rerun, and the failed attempt is retained. Greptile reviewed `ecd3dcc0e998f07cf56fcb1f087946f50f388bec` at 5/5 with no remaining findings. - No Docker or broad builds ran on the developer machine. CI performs repository checks on the configured fleet. ## Risks Grok runs require an eval revision that records `authenticationMode` in the roster summary. Missing evidence fails closed. The credential contains account access and refresh tokens; an owner must approve its delivery to the protected environment before a live run. The change adds no PR trigger or authorization bypass. Live subscription protocol qualification remains pending this workflow reaching master. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b648d8cdda |
fix(evals): support explicit Grok qualification workflows (#13878)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their provider connections. > - Product E2E checks real tasks through the browser, server, and runner. > - Grok qualification needs separate API-key and subscription evidence. > - Product subscription tests and direct Grok protocol evals need explicit credential delivery. > - This change supplies each credential only to its selected profile and prepares the pinned binary. > - Maintainer authorization and protected-environment gates remain required. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13845, #13847, #13850, #13882. The Grok feature branch has a manual subscription qualification profile. The trusted master workflow must admit its selected credential and prepare the same verified binary and artifact verifier as the API profile. Direct protocol evals also need the selected xAI key and pinned Grok binary. These prerequisites do not register or schedule the new profiles on master. ## What Changed - Deliver `GROK_AUTH_JSON` from the protected paid environment only when the selected profile requests that credential. - Install the checksum-verified Grok binary for the local subscription profile. - Prepare the pinned artifact verifier for the manual subscription suite. - Extend workflow security assertions to cover the new credential and profile. - Add the ACPX Grok credential mapping to the trusted-master catalog, then deliver only the selected `XAI_API_KEY` to direct protocol cells and install the target’s checksum-verified Grok binary before packaging. - Allow a direct-protocol concurrency override from two cases up to the existing configured ceiling; it can only lower concurrency. - Document the Grok protocol workflow and its API-only credential boundary. - Render missing LLM usage and cost as Unavailable, and label partial observations with coverage. Preserve raw records, grades, and actual zero costs. - Preserve measured campaign source metadata during report regeneration instead of inheriting the renderer checkout or CI event; skip empty legacy source records when recovering older provenance. ## Verification - Latest commit `05d05801477104c8155977bbbe3e119a5241f960`: all 54 reported checks successful, two intentional skips, Greptile 5/5, and zero unresolved review threads. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35890978288). - After merging current master, all 17 workflow security/image tests and 23 catalog/workflow policy tests passed. The trusted catalog also generated all 39 pinned Grok cells with `XAI_API_KEY` and one case per shard. The new policy tests execute the concurrency guard against valid, out-of-range, and malformed values. - The Grok branch separately passed 450 Product harness unit tests, including private company credential staging, cleanup, and token-fragment redaction. - The fresh-login native subscription smoke passed three repetitions of tool execution, session resume, restrictive permissions, and cleanup. These are setup evidence; full subscription Product qualification remains pending. - All 72 focused report/billing/history/catalog tests and the Product harness typecheck passed for the report-display change. The initial sandbox run could not open the tsx IPC socket; the permitted rerun passed. A zero-provider-call replay of the actual 16-cell Grok campaign preserved all result records, grades, timing, and source provenance while correcting missing usage labels. - Review the thirteen-file diff. Provider credentials still enter only the selected paid-test step; default-branch, numeric-actor, and environment restrictions are unchanged. ## Risks This admits a refreshable subscription credential to explicitly selected trusted tests. Store it only in `runner-e2e-paid`, use a test login, and remove it after qualification. Unselected profiles receive an empty value. Pull requests cannot trigger the paid workflow. This PR changes no fleet admission or actor allowlist. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with tool use and code execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
1ef3b08714 |
feat(ui): integrate agent personas across the app (#13171)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A stable agent persona is useful only when the same identity appears across the app. > - Lists, task messages, selectors, and activity feeds need inexpensive static avatars. > - Onboarding and agent headers need a larger character with expressions and pointer tracking. > - This pull request connects the persona foundation to those existing views and preserves onboarding draft assignments. > - Full-page stories and Linux checks make the placements and performance contract reviewable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Agents need a stable visual identity in lists, tasks, onboarding, and configuration. External tools also need an image URL for that identity. **Proposed solution** Assign each agent a permanent palette from a fixed ClipLab character library. Store the assignment on the agent. Render and cache preset PNG URLs on demand. Use static images in dense views and one animated character in larger placements. **Alternatives considered** A generated image bundle requires a separate asset build. A live renderer in every avatar adds unnecessary work in large lists. Arbitrary uploaded images do not provide the requested shared character system. **Roadmap alignment** This improves agent identity across existing control-plane views. It preserves agent permissions, company boundaries, and status labels. ROADMAP.md has no separate ClipLab persona milestone. Related approaches: #2422 adds configurable image URLs and DiceBear generation; #5578 adds optional uploaded avatars. This work uses a fixed, versioned character library and preset URLs. ## What Changed - Replace agent icons with static persona images across lists, the sidebar, org charts, tasks, comments, selectors, activity, and dashboard views. - Put one animated character in the agent header. Let it follow the pointer across the page, with reduced-motion and touch fallbacks. - Add larger padded characters to agent creation. Keep the palette stable across draft refreshes and connection retries, then reveal it after success. - Pass appearance through shared projections rather than fetching each agent separately. - Add real full-page Storybook examples for the agent list, overview, task, dashboard, new-agent dialog, and connection page. - Add Linux screenshot, clipping, density, and 500-avatar performance checks. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and token gates pass on the rebased tree. Persona lifecycle tests pass. - The rebased feature passes 38 Linux screenshot/performance checks, including both display densities, corner pointer positions, and the no-WebGL/no-live-download contract for 500 avatars. - The final Linux persona suite passes all 38 visual, lifecycle, density, and full-page checks using the standard Storybook configuration and real on-demand avatar endpoint. - Final local focused verification: 45 avatar/native-recovery tests pass; UI identity/routine tests, typecheck/build, token gates, and Storybook build pass. - Current-head CI passes: full workspace/server tests, all serialized server groups, typecheck/release checks, build, canary validation, and end-to-end shards. The build passed after retrying a native-runner concurrency-test failure; its three targeted cases also pass locally. - Manual inspection covered stable identities in the app, header placement, full-page mouse tracking, onboarding size, and task/dashboard placements. ### Screenshots Linux captures use synthetic Storybook fixtures. Full-page captures use reduced motion. The live character, mouse tracking, and disposal are checked separately. <details> <summary>Agent overview with the character in its header</summary> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/8c68f42b268ada22b67d79d0fe1bb0a2f84ec25c/screenshots/full-page-agent-overview.png" width="900" alt="Agent overview with the character in its header" /> </details> <details> <summary>Task messages and assignee identity</summary> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/8c68f42b268ada22b67d79d0fe1bb0a2f84ec25c/screenshots/full-page-task.png" width="900" alt="Task messages and assignee identity" /> </details> <details> <summary>Larger onboarding character with room for expressions</summary> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/8c68f42b268ada22b67d79d0fe1bb0a2f84ec25c/screenshots/full-page-meet-your-next-agent.png" width="900" alt="Larger onboarding character with room for expressions" /> </details> <details> <summary>Dashboard agent activity</summary> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/8c68f42b268ada22b67d79d0fe1bb0a2f84ec25c/screenshots/full-page-company-dashboard.png" width="900" alt="Dashboard agent activity" /> </details> ## Risks - This PR depends on #13170, the persona foundation. Merge the foundation first, then retarget this PR to master. - Many placements change from icons to character silhouettes. Human avatars and authoritative agent status labels retain their existing behavior. - Only one character can render live per view. Reduced motion, hidden/offscreen content, touch input, and renderer failures use the defined fallbacks. - The full-page stories use fixture data. They do not contact a real company or complete real provider sign-in. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact model identifier and context window are not exposed in this session. Used code editing, shell execution, browser inspection, and Linux visual testing. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Tonio <tonework@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
352153b5ed |
fix: run the cargo-building native-runner CI suite in the Rust-cached vitest lane (#13586)
## Thinking Path Post-merge of #13557, the slowest check on the freshest fully-green PR run ([35246999382](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35246999382)) was `ci / General tests (server (1/12))` at **339s**. The cause is one suite: `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-codex-runner.integration.test.ts` runs 1 test in **277s of a 291s vitest step (95%)** because its `beforeAll` cargo-builds the Runner release binaries, and the general-server shards carry no Rust cache — every PR run cold-compiles the full third-party crate graph. The other 19 suites in that shard finish in under 70ms each. The obvious fix (a dedicated Rust-cached matrix lane) requires editing workflow files, which the available GitHub App credentials cannot push (`workflows` permission). But the `Verify Paperclip Runner` lanes **already restore the shared `release-runner-v1` Rust cache read-only**, and their commands are `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner <package script>` — so the suite can move into a Rust-cached lane purely through script changes. ## What Changed - `scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs`: new `general-server-native-runner` group carrying exactly that suite. Under the PR workflow (`GITHUB_WORKFLOW == "PR"`, inherited from `pr.yml` by the reusable `pr-trusted.yml`) the without-chat server shards exclude it and rebalance to ~211s of tests each. Every other caller — local runs, `release-verify.yml` under the Release / Cloud readiness workflows — keeps the suite in the shards, so a renamed or unknown workflow degrades to today's slower-but-covered behavior instead of dropping coverage. - `packages/paperclip-runner`: `test:typescript:vitest` now routes through `scripts/run-pr-vitest-lane.mjs` — the identical `ensure:eval-build-deps && build:rust && vitest run` chain (shard flags passed through), plus the native-runner group on the **final PR shard only** (`--shard=N/M` with `N == M`, i.e. today's `vitest 2/2`, the 122s lane). With the restored cache the suite's cargo build becomes an incremental rebuild. - `scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: guards pin the whole contract — PR 12-shard coverage (shards + chat + native-runner = full server group exactly), Release/local 10-shard runs keep the suite, `pr.yml` is named `PR`, the vitest lanes partition with exactly one final shard, the package-script wiring, and the wrapper's shard/workflow gating via its `--dry-run` plan output. No workflow files change. `.github/workflows/*` are untouched. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`: **36/36 pass** locally on this branch (includes the new coverage, wiring, and wrapper-gating guards). Both files run in CI's `Test general-server shard partition` / `Test release verify workflow wiring` steps. - Wrapper `--dry-run` plan matrix verified for all six shard/workflow combinations plus malformed-shard rejection (pinned as a guard test). - The executing proof is this PR's own CI: `ci / Verify Paperclip Runner (vitest 2/2)` must go green while running the native-runner suite (its log will show the `general-server-native-runner` group after the package vitest shard), and the 12 `ci / General tests (server (x/12))` shards must go green without it. ## Risks - The exclusion keys on `GITHUB_WORKFLOW == "PR"`. Failure mode of a rename is safe (suite falls back into the server shards, slower but covered) and the guard test on `pr.yml`'s name makes it loud. - `vitest 2/2` grows from ~122s to an expected ~210–260s — still well under the ~306s `vitest 1/2` and ~326s e2e shards, and inside the 20-minute lane timeout. If the cache misses (key drift), the lane pays a cold compile like the server shard does today; a miss is slow, never wrong. - Double-run/coverage-loss combinations are enumerated in the wrapper header and pinned by tests: each caller runs the suite exactly once. ## Model Used Claude (Bender agent, Paperclip) — Fable 5. --- Expected savings once merged: the 339s `server (1/12)` check drops to ~265s-equivalent shard levels (~211s of tests), the slowest `ci /` check becomes the ~326s e2e shard (~13–33s off PR wall time), and every PR run stops paying ~4.5 min of billed cold Rust compile. For the merger (squash): please keep the trailer below in the squash body to preserve authorship. `Co-Authored-By: Bender (Fable) <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com>` ## Related PRs Searched the GitHub PR list for prior work on this surface — related groundwork, none duplicate this change: - #13457 — restored master's Rust dependency cache on the PR runner lane (the read-only cache this PR relies on) - #13500 — made that cache key image-toolchain-independent so GitHub-hosted PR runners actually hit it - #13521 — rebalanced PR shards and split the Verify Paperclip Runner lanes this PR extends - #13557 — previous health-check iteration (split the runnerd transport suite); this PR targets the next slowest check ## Checklist - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
d08abcba15 |
ci: cut PR wall clock from ~16 to ~6 minutes (#13521)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the Trusted PR CI workflow before merge > - The test suites roughly tripled in six weeks, and shard balance did not keep up, so PR runs crept from ~4 to ~17 minutes > - Slow CI delays every merge and every contributor > - This pull request rebalances the shards from fresh measurements, splits the largest test files, reuses the Rust build cache in three more jobs, and takes the policy job off the critical path > - The benefit is a PR wall clock near 6 minutes with the same coverage ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** PR CI wall clock. A typical green run took 16-17 minutes. Two months ago it took about 4 minutes. **Subsystem affected** The Trusted PR CI workflow (`.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`), the shard-duration manifests, the vitest shard runner scripts, the `paperclip-runner` package scripts, and the dry-run branch of `release.sh`. **Current behavior** The shard-duration manifests were stale. The general-server manifest had durations for ~400 of 649 suites. The e2e manifest was missing 14 of 29 specs. Stale median weights made shard steps range 417s-806s (server) and 277s-745s (e2e). Three jobs each paid a ~3m40s cold cargo release build. Every test lane waited ~60s for the policy job before it could start. **Proposed behavior** All lanes finish in a narrow ~200-290s band. The manifests carry fresh measured durations for every suite. The three largest test files are split so no single file caps a shard. The Rust cache restore runs in every job that builds the Runner binary. Test lanes start as soon as the gate resolves. **Reason and benefit** Merges stop waiting on CI. The projected wall clock is ~6 minutes for the same test coverage. ## What Changed - Rebuild `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json` (646 suites) and `scripts/e2e-shard-durations.json` (all specs) from per-suite completion timestamps in runs 35036001734 and 35024948947. - Move the PR server lane to the release-verify shape: `general-server-without-chat` across twelve duration-balanced shards, plus the chat integration suite split by collected test location across three dedicated lanes. - Split `tests/e2e/chat-adapters-ui.spec.ts` into `-providers` and `-messaging` specs, and `tests/e2e/agent-chat.spec.ts` into `-sessions` and `-projects` specs. Each pair shares fixtures through a `.shared.ts` module. Playwright collects the same test sets (39 and 20 tests). - Raise e2e shards to eight and serialized shards to nine. - Run the runner package's `check:all` as four matrix lanes: `check:static`, `check:runner`, and two native vitest `--shard` halves. The union is exactly `check:all`. - Add the read-only Rust cache restore (toolchain pin, `save-if: false`) to the Canary Dry Run, Build, and Typecheck jobs. - Make release.sh preview publish payloads concurrently in batches of eight during `--dry-run`. The real publish path stays strictly serial. - Drop the policy-job lockfile artifact chain. Each lane installs with `--frozen-lockfile` and falls back to an inline `--resolution-only` regeneration. The policy job stays a required check through the `verify` and `e2e` aggregates. - Update the shard-count mirrors and workflow assertions in the partition and gate tests. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` — 30 pass. - `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/'*.test.mjs` — 410 pass. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-dry-run-notes.test.mjs` — 42 pass. - `playwright test --list` collects 39 tests across the chat-adapters split and 20 across the agent-chat split, equal to the original files. - A local vitest collection of the chat suite partitions 995 tests into 498/497 line shards. - Projected shard weights: server 230s x12, chat ~143s x3, e2e 207-242s x8, serialized ~216s x9. ## Risks - The split spec files reorder tests relative to the original files. Every describe seeds its own company, so the specs stay independent; a hidden cross-describe dependency would surface as a deterministic failure in one shard. - The inline lockfile fallback changes install behavior for manifest-changing and stacked PRs. The policy job still validates resolution as a required check. - `release.sh` changes are confined to the `--dry-run` preview branch. The publish loop is untouched. `bash -n` passes and the release dry-run tests pass. - One PR now schedules ~44 fleet runners. If the RunsOn fleet caps concurrency, queueing may absorb part of the gain; watch the first runs. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic), extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file edits) in Claude Code. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4510bf7c9e |
ci: use code-owner-reviewed master for trusted PR workflow (#13470)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Pull request CI uses a trusted workflow on the AWS runner fleet. > - The caller used a fixed SHA that also needed runner-group admission. > - A mainline pin update left CI queued because the group still allowed older SHAs. > - This pull request calls the trusted workflow on master, which requires code-owner review. > - New merged workflow versions can use the existing master runner-group entry. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12968. That Dependabot PR proposes another SHA rotation. This change keeps this first-party workflow on master instead. **What happened?** CI run 34975562974 stayed queued because its trusted workflow SHA was absent from the runner-group allowlist. The fleet itself was healthy. **Expected behavior** New reviewed versions of the trusted workflow on master should receive runner access without a separate SHA allowlist update. **Steps to reproduce** Change the caller to a new trusted workflow SHA without adding that SHA to the restricted runner group. Its jobs remain queued. The master reference removes that recurring synchronization step. ## What Changed - Call `paperclipai/paperclip/.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml@master`. - Exclude this exact first-party workflow from Dependabot updates. - Update the existing E2E shard workflow tests for the master caller contract. - Document the runner-group entry, required code-owner review, and old-reference retention. ## Verification - `actionlint .github/workflows/pr.yml` passed. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/cloud-runner-routing.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-dependency-cache.test.mjs` passed: 35 tests. - Parsed Dependabot YAML and checked the exact workflow exclusion. - `git diff --check` passed. - Live GitHub checks confirmed `.github/**` has code owners, CODEOWNERS has no errors, and the active master ruleset requires code-owner review. This covers the trusted workflow, caller, and CODEOWNERS itself. - The approved organization setting now allows `paperclipai/paperclip/.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml@refs/heads/master`. All previous references and other runner-group settings remain intact. - Full application typecheck, tests, and build were not repeated locally for this workflow-only change. This PR's CI and review are pending. ## Risks New versions of the trusted workflow take effect for new callers after merge to master. Keep code-owner review and master protection enabled. Existing administrator pull-request bypasses remain unchanged. Third-party action pins, runner routing, and infrastructure are unchanged. Older callers still use their SHA pins; their allowed refs remain in place. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex performed implementation and orchestration; its exact runtime variant and context-window size were not exposed. OpenAI `gpt-5.6-luna` with high reasoning inspected workflow assumptions and applied the approved runner-group setting. Both used code and tool access. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
d2e940f4c1 |
ci: run release Runner protocol and Rust checks in parallel (#13326)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip Cloud deploys verified images from merged source commits. > - Cloud readiness waits for every release verification check. > - Runner verification currently runs long TypeScript tests before Rust checks. > - These checks can run on independent runners with their own build directories. > - This PR runs them in parallel while preserving all checks and the shared dependency cache. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13194. Related prior work: #13142 and #13259. A search found no duplicate parallel release-check change. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Time from merge to Cloud source verification and deployment readiness. **Current behavior** Recent successful runs take roughly 13 minutes from merge to deployable. In run 34705914878, Runner verification took 11m23s. Protocol tests finished before Rust tests and API authority checks started. **Proposed behavior** Run protocol and Rust verification in two matrix jobs. Cloud readiness still requires both jobs to pass. **Reason and benefit** Remove the serial dependency between independent checks. Expected improvement is about 2–3 minutes on a typical cached run, until the image build or server tests become the longest job. This is an estimate; post-merge timing will confirm it. **Breaking changes** Individual release Runner job names gain a lane suffix. Cloud source and readiness marker names stay the same. PR runner routing is unchanged. ## What Changed - Split release Runner checks into protocol and Rust lanes. Keep every constituent of `check:all` exactly once. - Restore the existing Rust dependency cache in both lanes. Allow only the Rust lane to save it after warming both build profiles. - Add coverage and cache authorization regressions. Document the parallel verification and single cache writer. ## Verification - Passed 477 workflow and source-verification tests with `node --test .github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs scripts/cloud-source-verification.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs`. - Passed `actionlint`, `git diff --check`, and the private AWS routing regression suite. - Passed local `pnpm -r typecheck` and the standalone `check:runner && check:api-authority` lane, including all 1,671 API tests before the protocol lane had built TypeScript output. - The broad local protocol run under Node 25 had four failures. The two affected files passed under CI's Node 24.19.0: 67 passed, 6 platform skips. - Local `pnpm test:run` aborted when disk space ran out; local `pnpm build` could not run afterward. These are local verification limits. [Linux CI run 34710421424](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34710421424) passed full typecheck, all grouped tests, native verification, build, release dry run, and browser checks. Native protocol CI passed 1,986 tests, plus 1,671 API tests and the Rust suites. - Latest-head Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings. All 33 current-head checks are successful or intentionally skipped. ## Risks - Uses one additional short-lived verification runner per release verification. The existing AWS exact-master restriction remains in place. - The Rust lane warms debug dependencies so its cache save also serves protocol tests. Both lanes always rebuild workspace code. - A workflow regression could omit a check. The new coverage test compares the matrix checks directly with `check:all`; Cloud readiness depends on the complete reusable workflow. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context window are not exposed by this environment. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
44dde2dec4 |
ci: reuse dependency caches without per-PR uploads (#13300)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Cloud releases wait for source verification before deployment.
> - That verification reuses compiled Rust dependencies to finish
sooner.
> - PR jobs save large pnpm stores under separate merge refs and
different lockfile keys.
> - Those copies compete with master build caches for the repository's
10 GB cache limit.
> - This PR makes PR dependency caches restore-only and reuses
master-compatible keys.
> - A separate pin update will activate the reviewed workflow.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
PR merge refs accumulated roughly 700 MB copies of the same pnpm store.
Master Rust caches disappeared, and Cloud readiness run
[34656098157](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34656098157)
rebuilt dependencies after cache misses. The repository currently has a
10 GB limit. GitHub rejected a request for 50 GB; that setting needs
separate organization/billing access.
**Expected behavior**
PR jobs should reuse downloaded packages without evicting post-merge
compilation caches through duplicate uploads.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run several PRs while the checked-in lockfile needs policy
regeneration.
2. Compare the setup-node keys in PR jobs and master jobs.
3. List Actions caches by ref, key, and archive size. The PR keys repeat
across merge refs.
**Paperclip version or commit**
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
30c63af0e6 |
fix(cli): recover abandoned workspace build locks (#13288)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The test-drive command starts an isolated instance for local testing. > - Source startup builds shared packages before it starts the server. > - An interrupted build can leave an empty lock directory. > - Later starts wait without output and fail after 60 seconds. > - This pull request recovers abandoned locks and shows build progress. > - Local testing can start again without manual lock removal. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** `pnpm paperclipai test-drive` stopped at “Starting Paperclip server…” in a source checkout. A leftover plugin build lock caused a silent 60-second wait and then a timeout. **Expected behavior** Startup should recover an abandoned build lock. It should show when it waits for a live build. An interrupted or failed build should not leave partial output that the next start accepts as complete. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Leave an empty `node_modules/.cache/paperclip-plugin-build-deps.lock` directory after an interrupted build. 2. Make the shared or plugin SDK build output out of date. 3. Run `pnpm paperclipai test-drive --api-key placeholder --no-browser` with a fresh data directory. 4. Observe the silent wait at server startup. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced at `2083bf6f9`. **Deployment mode** Local source checkout with an isolated embedded PostgreSQL instance. Related work: #12894 added test-drive. #12898 restored its credential inputs. Neither change handles abandoned workspace build locks. No duplicate fix was found. ## What Changed - Publish a lock directory with an owner record in one rename. - Recover locks after their owner and compiler exit. Recover legacy empty locks after two minutes. - Keep the lock until the compiler stops on SIGINT or SIGTERM. - Print build and lock-wait progress. - Record source, dependency, compiler-config, and output content fingerprints only after a successful compile. Recover partial output even when modification times are unchanged. - Add 12 process-level regression tests and update the development guide. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/ensure-plugin-build-deps.test.mjs`: 12 tests pass. - `pnpm exec vitest run --config cli/vitest.config.ts cli/src/__tests__/test-drive.test.ts`: 32 tests pass. - `pnpm --filter paperclipai typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm --filter paperclipai build`: passed. - Live smoke tests: fresh startup and startup with an abandoned lock both reach ready state. The API and UI respond. The command creates the company and CEO and enables worktree execution. Test instances stop cleanly. - Full repository `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed. - Full Vitest suite coverage completed using the repository-supported server, chat, workspace, and serialized shards. The initial local run needed the fresh-worktree fake native-provider binary built and focused reruns for port/socket races and load-related timeouts; all affected tests passed on rerun. Suites skipped by fail-fast exits were run separately and passed. The initial serial `pnpm test:run` was stopped in favor of these shards. - Greptile: 5/5 on commit `8b5a790c2af06a52b5dc76e5f52331966df990b8`, with all review threads resolved. - CI: 31 checks passed and two Storybook checks intentionally skipped. The initial workspace and browser jobs were interrupted by runner shutdowns; both passed on the second attempt. Build, typecheck, canary dry run, all general and serialized tests, all browser shards, security checks, and final verification summaries are green. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34654730783) ## Risks - This changes shared source-build locking for the CLI and plugin SDK commands. - Legacy locks have no owner identity. Recovery uses a two-minute age threshold for empty legacy directories. - Startup reads and hashes source and output files to verify the build cache. Identical direct builds reuse the cache. Changed or partial output requires a rebuild. - A reused process ID can delay recovery. Live owner or compiler processes keep their lock. - No database, API, or UI contract changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution, and process-level testing. A more specific API model identifier and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9031516a7e |
fix: recover legacy Daytona startup failures from task and inbox (#13272)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Legacy conversation adapters can run in Daytona sandboxes. > - A server restart during provisioning can occur before the invocation event exists. > - Recovery then lacks the old adapter identity and leaves a hold that ordinary user retries cannot clear. > - A remote launch can also fail when its host relay looks for Node in the sandbox PATH. > - This pull request records the adapter at claim time and restores explicit user continuation after verified cleanup. > - Users can recover from the task or inbox while the failed run and uncertain action history remain intact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13237, #13239, #13254. Those changes cover recorded conversation runs, native user continuation, and explicit remote Stop. This change covers legacy failure before `adapter.invoke` and exact task/inbox Retry. Refs #9771 for overlapping generated-command quoting. This change also supplies the absolute host Node executable. Refs #13163 and #13264 for the separate native restart and retained-workspace work. **What happened?** A legacy Daytona run interrupted during provisioning became `process_lost` without an invocation event. Recovery preserved an execution hold, and Retry or a new task reply could not resume it. Cleanup could also run before the Daytona plugin was ready. On a macOS host, a subsequent ACP relay launch failed with `env: node: No such file or directory` because the remote launch environment did not contain the host Node path. **Expected behavior** An interrupted conversation can continue after its previous execution stops. Explicit Retry and new user replies should start a fresh turn with the task history. Cleanup failures must remain visible and recoverable. The host relay must use the host Node executable. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a legacy Claude adapter with a Daytona environment. 2. Interrupt the server after it acquires the sandbox lease and before it records `adapter.invoke`. 3. Restart and inspect the task hold. 4. Retry from the task or inbox, or send a new task reply. 5. Confirm the old sandbox has stopped and one new response arrives. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from master at `3bafac12f796fbea02e609e1074a9639f872e9c4`. The branch is rebased on `51b0e01ea`, including #13261 and #13270. **Deployment mode** Built from source on macOS with a real Daytona sandbox and the legacy Claude ACP adapter. ## What Changed - Count new browser specs with the scheduler's median duration in the shard-balance check. This fixes a false policy failure after new specs arrive from both branches. The balance threshold is unchanged. - Persist server-owned adapter identity in the queued-to-running claim before provisioning starts. - Wait for provider plugin startup before restart cleanup. Keep failed cleanup leases as active ownership blockers. - Admit exact board retries and new user comments after verified termination. Retain the old run, task history, approvals, and unknown action outcomes. - Adopt repeated Retry requests. Permit one scoped cleanup attempt per explicit user Retry after the automatic limit, with an activity record. A later user Retry can recover after a transient provider failure; automatic attempts remain capped. - Resume replies deferred during cleanup, including historical legacy startup failures. - Launch the host ACP relay through the absolute host Node executable. - Add a task-level Retry button and return actionable blockers when retry admission is refused. - Add database regressions and three browser recovery journeys. Exclude installed third-party dependency skills from the shipped-skill audit. ## Verification - Current head: `d23c84181`, rebased on `51b0e01ea`. Conflict resolution retains the saved-message recovery, local stop receipts, and wait reasons from #13270 alongside exact legacy Retry support. - Real Daytona: interrupted the server after lease acquisition and before adapter invocation. Restart cleanup confirmed provider termination. Task Retry cleared a seeded historical hold and a real Claude agent returned `Recovery verified.` in the task. Removed the disposable sandbox and environment after testing. - All three browser recovery journeys passed again after the final rebase. Task Retry, Inbox Retry, and a new reply each produced one fresh successor, completed the task, preserved the failed run, and retained the answer after reload. - All 29 e2e/server shard-partition tests passed. The balance check now uses the scheduler's median fallback for unmeasured specs, with the same balance threshold. - Server typecheck passed after rebuilding the generated runner dependencies. The combined recovery/route run passed 136 of 137 tests. Its remaining route test timed out during the first cold module import at its explicit 10-second limit; an isolated rerun reproduced that timeout and passed the other 51 route cases. The complete CI suite passed on this head. The same route file passed all 52 cases in CI, including the first cold import in 7.5 seconds. - Before the final rebase, recursive typecheck, full build, UI token gates, 132 targeted server tests, and the complete [CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34650004085) passed. The subsequent CI failure was the shard-balance accounting mismatch fixed here. - Greptile reviewed `d23c84181` at 5/5 with no outstanding actionable findings. The complete [current CI workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34653327949) passed on attempt 2. All test, typecheck, build, and canary jobs passed on the first attempt. Docker setup timed out fetching BuildKit from Docker Hub; retrying that job and its dependent aggregate succeeded. ## Risks - Recovery admission changes executable authority. Company, task, agent, user, approvals, process ownership, and provider termination checks remain required. - Explicit continuation starts a fresh conversation with history. It does not certify unknown external action outcomes or rerun non-conversation adapters automatically. - Changing task status alone does not clear an execution hold. The task now offers an explicit Retry action. - Historical adapter claims and invocation events take precedence over current agent settings. Known process or webhook runs retain their hold. Pre-upgrade rows with no adapter evidence may receive only a new explicit user turn after termination proof; they do not become eligible for automatic replay. - No schema migration or sandbox-image change is required. This branch has not been deployed to production. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, code execution, browser automation, and test execution. The exact deployment model ID and context window are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
37d7dfb0e3 |
ci: allow dependency changes in cloud eval verification (#13286)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud deployment requires source verification for the exact merged commit. > - Contributor PRs leave lockfile updates to a separate bot PR. > - Most release checks can refresh an outdated lockfile while installing dependencies. > - Two Runner checks still require a frozen lockfile and fail after dependency changes. > - This PR gives those checks the same install policy as the other release checks. > - A valid dependency change can become deployable without waiting for another merge. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13257. The dependency change in #13256 exposed this gap. The separate lockfile update is #13279. Related #12115 addresses the bot PR check trigger; this PR fixes exact-source cloud verification itself. **What happened?** [Cloud readiness for |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
4fde92107e |
fix(ci): reuse cloud source verification for npm canaries (#13233)
Reuse the exact master source-verification result before npm canary publication, removing a duplicate verification matrix while preserving fail-closed release checks. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
96bba78fba |
feat: add readable Storybook branch bookmarks (#13231)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work. > - Maintainers use Storybook previews to review the board UI. > - Branch previews need stable bookmarks that people can read. > - The current publisher only provides a hashed branch path. > - This pull request adds a readable branch bookmark after each successful upload. > - Existing branch and build links keep working. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13226. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Manual Storybook publication for repository branches. **Current behavior** The stable branch path contains a hash. The expected `/storybook/branches/master/` URL does not exist. **Proposed behavior** Each publication updates a readable bookmark. The action summary and Markdown artifact link it. Master uses `/storybook/branches/master/`. Other names use a safe path segment that preserves case and escapes special characters. **Reason and benefit** Maintainers can save and share a readable URL that opens the latest published branch build. **Breaking changes** None. Existing hashed branch entries still update. Existing build URLs remain valid. **Additional context** This follows the publisher in #13226. A duplicate search found no related bookmark change. It does not overlap planned core work in ROADMAP.md. ## What Changed - Generate readable branch bookmarks without collisions with existing build directories. - Upload the bookmark only after the full build and compatibility entry uploads succeed. - Link the bookmark in the existing summary and Markdown artifact. - Document branch-name escaping and test path isolation, stable links, and upload order. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/storybook-deploy.test.mjs`: 20 tests pass. - `actionlint .github/workflows/storybook-deploy.yml .github/workflows/storybook-visual.yml`: passes. - `git diff --check`: passes. - [Master bookmark publication](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34613344758): passed. Opened `/storybook/branches/master/` in the browser and confirmed a story renders. Downloaded the Markdown report and verified its bookmark link. - [Feature branch bookmark publication](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34613449034): passed. Its separate bookmark uses `codex~2Fstorybook-bookmarks`. - Greptile: 5/5 on `dccaf10413ecf447cb34e622b6b3c505791abb51`, with no unresolved review threads. All current-head Paperclip CI gates pass, including typecheck, tests, build, browser suites, and the canary dry run. - Full local repository checks were not repeated for this focused publisher change. The preceding run passed typecheck but encountered unrelated native-session test failures. ## Risks - Special characters in branch names use `~HH` byte escapes. For example, `feature/foo` becomes `feature~2Ffoo`. - Names that could overlap an existing hashed build directory escape the final hyphen. Very long names retain a hash suffix. - The two branch entries update separately. If the final upload fails, the workflow fails and a rerun can repair the bookmark. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and live deployment verification. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
974949a39b |
ci: spread cloud server verification across ten runners (#13227)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud waits for source verification before deploying a new image. > - The slowest server verification job spends about ten minutes running tests. > - Each job uses one test worker to preserve test isolation. > - This pull request distributes those suites across ten standard hosted runners. > - The benefit is a shorter verification path with the same test coverage. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Current behavior** In [readiness run 34572340764](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34572340764), the slowest server job ran for 638 seconds. Test execution used 594 seconds. This held readiness behind the image job. **Proposed behavior** Use ten general server jobs in the reusable release verification workflow. Keep the three chat jobs and every existing prerequisite. The complete partition test verifies that no server suite is omitted or duplicated. **Reason and benefit** Reduce merge-to-deployable time on the existing runner type. The next longest prerequisite was Runner verification at 526 seconds, so the initial expected total gain is about two minutes rather than a halving of readiness time. Measure actual queue and execution time before claiming a result. Related: #13198 introduced the separate chat lane. #12577 refreshes duration estimates; this change leaves that manifest alone. ## What Changed - Increase the general server matrix from five jobs to ten. - Verify the ten-way partition covers the complete server suite when combined with the chat lane. - Document runner demand and the unchanged local and PR grouping. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 29 passed. - `actionlint .github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: passed. - Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed. - All latest-head GitHub CI checks passed, including the complete Linux test partition, build, typecheck, and browser gates. Greptile: 5/5 with zero open findings. - [Ten-shard timing probe](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34606772388): all 16 jobs passed; slowest server job 6m 23s versus 10m 38s in the earlier five-shard sample. This compares the server lane, not total readiness, and is not a controlled same-source A/B. - The full local `pnpm test:run` is also running. It has reproduced previously observed macOS-only failures in unchanged skill-cache and native-session suites; the corresponding Linux CI suites passed. Final local results will be attached separately. No affected-workflow test failed. ## Risks Five additional concurrent jobs per release verification run increase runner demand and repeated setup work. Queueing can offset the gain. Test workers, timeouts, permissions, and readiness requirements stay unchanged. Revert the matrix and its partition test to restore the previous split. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 / Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the affected workflow tests locally and they pass; full-suite macOS limitations are disclosed above - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a20ecce409 |
feat: publish CODEOWNER-approved Storybook branch previews (#13226)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work. > - Maintainers use Storybook to review the board UI. > - Reviews need public previews of selected repository branches. > - Each branch needs its own URL so previews do not replace each other. > - This pull request adds manual, CODEOWNER-controlled publishing to S3 and CloudFront. > - The action returns stable branch links and permanent build links in its summary and a Markdown artifact. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The existing Storybook build and manual visual-review workflow. **Current behavior** The repository has no manual branch-preview publisher. A single GitHub Pages site cannot support independent publishers without combining their output. **Proposed behavior** A CODEOWNER selects a source branch and approves publication. Each branch has a stable CloudFront URL. A completed build becomes the branch target only after its upload succeeds. The action attaches `storybook-deployment.md` with the preview links and source commit. **Reason and benefit** Maintainers can share multiple branch previews at the same time. Branch builds have no repository token permissions or AWS credentials. Dependency caching and install hooks are disabled. The publisher cannot write runner dashboard files or delete objects. **Breaking changes** None. Normal visual checks keep their existing behavior. This does not change application code or GitHub Pages settings. **Additional context** Searched public issues and PRs for Storybook deployment work. No duplicate deployment proposal was found. This is maintainer infrastructure, not a roadmap-level core feature. ## What Changed - Add `Storybook Deploy` with a source-branch input and a manual entry through `Storybook Visual`. - Check the original actor and rerunner against default-branch CODEOWNERS. Require a protected deployment environment with CODEOWNER reviewers. - Separate public-source builds with no repository permissions from an OIDC publisher restricted to the Storybook S3 prefix. - Publish distinct branch URLs and retain build URLs. Preserve Storybook deep links across the branch redirect. - Add the run summary, a downloadable Markdown deployment report, focused tests, and operator setup docs and IAM policies. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/storybook-deploy.test.mjs`: 19 tests pass. - `actionlint .github/workflows/storybook-deploy.yml .github/workflows/storybook-visual.yml`: passes. - [Feature branch live publication and deployment-only rerun](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34533202273): passed. - [Master branch live publication](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34533204743): passed. - Both public branch URLs render a component story without browser errors. A deployment-only rerun updates only the selected branch entry and preserves the previous build URL. - AWS policy simulation allows Storybook uploads and denies dashboard writes and object deletion. - Full local typechecking passes. Full local tests, build, and current-head PR checks are running. - [Revised build and Markdown artifact validation](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34605623088): passed. Downloaded the report and verified its branch URL, build URL, and source commit. - The public verifier also checks that the stable branch URL points to this build and rejects stale targets. ## Risks - Storybook previews are public. Maintainers must publish only public UI fixtures. - Retained builds accumulate until an operator prunes them. - Environment reviewers must stay synchronized with CODEOWNERS. The workflow fails closed if its environment loses required protection. - The existing CloudFront distribution is shared with runner reports. Separate S3 prefixes and a dedicated role prevent the publisher from overwriting those reports. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and browser verification. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
fc06f7f05f |
fix(ci): isolate chaos verification by caller workflow (#13208)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Cloud deployments require verified artifacts for the merged source commit. > - Cloud readiness and the npm release independently run the same source checks. > - Their shared chaos workflow used only the source ref as its concurrency key. > - One caller could cancel the other caller's required job for the same commit. > - This pull request scopes that key to the caller workflow and source ref. > - Both callers can finish their checks without blocking deployment readiness. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13192 and #13205. Searched for related open issues and PRs; no duplicate fix was found. **What happened?** The master push for `398d304e15739d1ee6105633bd8a0e42c929d33f` started Cloud readiness and Release together. GitHub cancelled the Cloud readiness chaos job before it acquired a runner. Its annotation reported a higher-priority waiting request for the same concurrency group. The required readiness gate cannot pass after that cancellation. **Expected behavior** Cloud readiness and Release must each finish source verification for the same SHA. Standalone chaos evals must also have a separate group. **Steps to reproduce** Merge a commit to master while the npm release queue is empty. Both callers reach the reusable chaos workflow with the same source SHA. See [the cancelled job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34569569760/job/103168603926). **Paperclip version or commit** `398d304e15739d1ee6105633bd8a0e42c929d33f`. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions on master. ## What Changed - Add the caller workflow name to the chaos workflow concurrency group. Retain source isolation and cancellation of duplicate calls within the same workflow. - Add a regression test that evaluates the group for Cloud readiness, Release, and standalone evals at the same source SHA. - Document the concurrency boundary in the readiness runbook. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/preview-artifacts.test.mjs scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` passed: 26 tests. - The new regression test fails against the previous concurrency key and passes with this fix. - `actionlint -shellcheck= -pyflakes= .github/workflows/runner-chaos-evals.yml .github/workflows/release-verify.yml .github/workflows/cloud-readiness.yml` passed. - `git diff --check` passed. - The full local typecheck passed for the same application source in #13205. Its macOS general-server test phase had 10,471 passes and 70 failures in seven unchanged application test files: missing Cargo/Runner test binaries, filesystem permissions, timeouts, a port conflict, and a load-test count mismatch. Linux CI test checks passed. The full local build passed with Cargo on PATH. This PR changes workflow configuration, its test, and documentation only. - All CI checks pass on the final head, including typecheck, tests, browser suites, build, and canary dry run. Greptile is 5/5 with no open findings. After merge, verify both callers' chaos jobs complete for the same master SHA and record the resulting readiness time. ## Risks - Two callers may now run chaos tests at the same time. This uses two existing GitHub runners, which is the intended cost of independent verification. - Renaming a caller changes its concurrency group. The fixed prefix keeps this child group separate from caller-level concurrency groups. - The readiness gate continues to require every verification prerequisite. No gate is bypassed. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 / Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, and command/API tools. Exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed by this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (26 focused workflow/artifact tests) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
42961b6ef1 |
fix(ci): split release chat verification into test shards (#13198)
Split release chat verification into three validated test-line shards and balance other server suites across five runners using the measured native Runner integration cost. Retire each chat case's fixtures after assertions, preserve complete test coverage, and exercise the real shard CLI in PR tests. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
c5c80e1feb |
ci(release-verify): split server tests five ways like pr-trusted (#13185)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every master push publishes a canary through release.yml, gated by release-verify.yml — the fleet's staging deploys and the nightly/beta/stable chain all start from those canaries > - release-verify splits the server test suite across three shards with a 20-minute job cap, while pr-trusted splits the same suite across five > - The server suite grew on 2026-09-10 and the three shards moved to 17-19 minutes; that evening every push-triggered canary run was cancelled by the 20-minute cap mid-verify, and no canary published after 18:50 UTC > - This pull request mirrors pr-trusted's five-way server split in release-verify, putting shards back at the 10-15 minute range with real headroom > - The benefit is a canary lane that reports test verdicts instead of dying on an infrastructure cap ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Push-triggered Release runs stopped publishing canaries on 2026-09-10. Runs at 19:34, 22:30, and 22:37 UTC were all cancelled by "The job has exceeded the maximum execution time of 20m0s" on a `verify_canary / General tests (server (N/3))` shard. No canary published after 18:50 UTC, which also starves the staging fleet's continuous deploys. **Expected behavior** release-verify's server shards finish well inside the 20-minute cap and runs conclude with a test verdict, as pr-trusted's five-way split of the same suite does (10-15 minutes per shard). **Steps to reproduce** 1. Compare server shard durations in the `verify_canary` job across 2026-09-10: 11-14 minutes in the morning, 17-19 minutes from 15:06 UTC, over 20 minutes by evening. 2. Observe runs 34521169020, 34537798488, and 34538332689 cancelled at the cap. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at `d1ba17eec` (current tip; its canary run was one of the cancelled ones). ## What Changed - `release-verify.yml`: the `general-server` matrix goes from three shards to five, byte-for-byte the shape `pr-trusted.yml` already runs, with a comment recording why. ## Verification - The identical five-way split runs green on every pr-trusted run (10-15 minutes per shard today, including on PRs merged this evening). - The suite's own growth (slower chat-connector tests) is being addressed separately; this PR only removes the artificial cliff. ## Risks - Low risk: two more runners per verify run; no test content changes. If shard durations regress further, the cap fires again — which is the correct signal once shards have honest headroom. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5` (Claude Fable 5), extended thinking, tool use via Claude Code CLI. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
889947c238 |
feat: add experimental native chat connectors (#13038)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People also ask agents for work in their existing chat tools. > - Each external conversation needs one task and a current authorized source. > - Retries, Stop, and provider failures must not duplicate work or expose private data. > - The first chat PR establishes the opt-in provider and data contracts. > - This PR adds experimental channel integration and its durable control plane. > - Users can request work from connected channels and inspect delivery in Paperclip. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13100 and #13092. This is the second of exactly two chat PRs. Foundation #13100 is merged and changed 143 files. Runner prerequisite #13092 is also merged. This PR changes 400 files against master, below the 500-file review limit. It contains no wireframe images or HTML galleries. ## What Changed - Add native Slack, GitHub, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, and Discord chat connections. Keep chat disabled unless the operator enables experimental chat connectors. Preserve the production GitHub tool connection and its normal setup path. - Bind each provider bot identity to one immutable Paperclip agent. Bind each admitted external conversation to one task. Paperclip owns tasks, runs, permissions, and audit records. - Add durable admission, per-conversation queues, questions, task controls, progress, final replies, images, files, and delivery receipts. Board comments remain internal unless explicitly sent to the channel. - Check current identity, provider reach, resource access, credentials, runtime generation, and exact source before provider effects. Keep private responses private. Never send raw reasoning, private logs, credentials, or tool arguments. - Hold uncertain sends for explicit audited resolution. Make Board Send-to-channel atomic and idempotent. Keep reconnect and setup credentials in Paperclip secret storage. - Preserve current native-runner authority across retries, lost acknowledgements, and recovery. Keep immutable input and completion contracts separate from newer user input. Receipt reconciliation cannot launch a provider. - Reconcile chat close/new ordering and provider-effect lock order. Audit resource access changes in the same transaction. Submit only the selected resource from each UI toggle so stale pages cannot undo unrelated access changes. - Drain Codex stdout before certifying process exit. Bound the drain with the existing shutdown grace. Preserve observed terminal authority without treating an undrained process as successful or reusable. - Incorporate master `018ca5da` with its ACP Stop, mobile task layout, runner packaging, and official lock changes. Preserve dedicated chat-answer continuations in both directions when ordinary queued comments are adopted after Stop. - Fence late adapter readiness behind an earlier Stop for the same run. Preserve verified cleanup for registered adapters. Handle single Stop, agent pause, duplicate Stops, and failure release without creating a false cancellation receipt. - Incorporate master's `6dd48cad4` wake-queue extraction. Preserve exact failed-chat retry authorization and lineage, retired question-source suppression, and the block on generic recovery that would discard the admitted source. Fresh deferred input retains its separate promotion path. - Incorporate master `2a05b5ed3` and its queue-admission extraction, simplified transaction ports, and separate runner CI job. Preserve exact durable receipts, actor separation, and dedicated-answer isolation through the new module. A failed receipt insert rolls back the accompanying deferred-wake merge. ## Verification Current head: `afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a`, incorporating master `2a05b5ed3457ea33efd6895520447d1d97fe98d8`. The conflicts are resolved. This successor fixes two test-harness boundaries exposed by CI: per-case route-module preparation and actual durable-save completion before intentional runner termination. Production code and all existing test/turn deadlines are unchanged. [Exact-head Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13038#issuecomment-5587250594) is **5/5**, completed September 10 at 13:20:55 UTC, with no actionable findings or open review threads. [Fresh exact-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34481724341) passes **all 24 jobs**, including Build and both required aggregates. Normal exact-head guarded merge was attempted and rejected by the remaining branch approval policy: CODEOWNER review is required and no human approval is present. Normal **squash auto-merge is enabled** as of September 10 at 13:36:26 UTC. Requested CODEOWNERS have been notified; no approval bypass or self-approval was used. Earlier-head results below remain historical evidence, not qualification of this successor. - Final exact-head Linux evidence: 995/995 chat integration cases; 36/36 agent-skills routes; 35/35 runner live-session cases, including real process kill/resume; 1948 runner Vitest cases with three existing benchmark/platform guards; 870/870 API-authority cases; and 104 browser cases with four existing optional skips. Rust, conformance/replay, full repository build, typecheck, canary, all server/workspace shards, and both required aggregates pass with normal CI concurrency. Earlier failed attempts remain recorded below. - Latest test-only qualification: 141/141 route/permissions/authentication cases pass in separate cold forks, with plain server types and independent review clear. The real-runner suite passes 35/35, with plain runner types and independent review clear. A controlled premature-save acknowledgement fails as expected; matching ownership/effect/process evidence, rejected saves, real turn outcome, test abort, and pre-kill liveness are covered. No local reproduction of the original CI scheduling failure is claimed. The preceding [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34479680858) passes 21/24 jobs, including all 995 Linux chat cases and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); only Build, the skills serialized shard, and the required verification aggregate fail. Its exact-head Greptile review was 5/5. Both failed job logs are retained. - Final fixture qualification: all eight focused Discord cases and all 995 chat integration cases pass. The exact modal statement/PID is observed before taking the real connection lock; the test then proves its actual blocking relationship before mutation. Original SQL execution, provider behavior, negative assertions, and 1s/15s timeouts remain unchanged. Independent review is clear and test/production hashes remain frozen. The preceding [CI attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34477184777) passed 22 jobs, including Build/runner, typecheck, canary, all other test shards, and browser aggregate (104 passed, four existing optional skips); the two fixture failures and failed verification aggregate remain recorded, not relabeled as a pass. - Current queue-module composition: 308/308 recovery/batching/queue/Stop tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 89/89 module tests, including real PostgreSQL receipt-insert rollback; 24/24 workflow/module-boundary tests; plain server and UI types. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass in 1.4 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries, stable reviewed source hashes. The initial boundary failure is retained; its no-op service wrapper was removed without changing recovery context or weakening the check. An exploratory standalone test-directory typecheck fails because its new upstream transformation config is not a standalone typechecking project; standard CI/build does not invoke it, and no configuration was weakened to suppress those diagnostics. - The preceding head `e02a63d462ce5d47433b0aeb632bb6fd20aab1ba` passed [all 24 CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34436462958) and exact-head Greptile review at 5/5. Required CODEOWNER review prevented its normal merge before master advanced again. - Final extracted-module composition: 307/307 recovery, batching, queue and Stop-control tests; 995/995 full chat integration; 49/49 module tests including eight PostgreSQL adapter cases; and 19/19 issue-update tests. Plain server types pass. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass in 1.3 minutes. Fresh databases, no skips or retries in these cohorts, frozen source hashes, and independent review clear. - The preceding head `3e4e1c1c` passes [all PR CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34415826820), including Build and required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`. Both the original Rust failure and the previously load-sensitive lineage fixture pass with unchanged Linux concurrency. Master advanced afterward and required this reconciliation. - Final master composition: 448/448 focused UI tests, 186/186 adapter tests, 24/24 queue/control tests, and 11/11 packaging tests. Plain UI, server, shared, and adapter types pass. Token gates and diff checks pass. Independent server and UI reviews are clear. - Stop-registration regression: both real-service cases fail against exact `a95` source and pass with the fix. The full corrected recovery/control suite passes 265/265. Duplicate-owner and failed-Stop controls also pass. Plain server types pass. The readiness barrier prevents provider startup without adding an acknowledgment to an already terminal run. - Final qualification strengthens terminal-field equality and repeats both affected cases successfully on a fresh database. All four actual local process/ACP browser paths pass again in 1.3 minutes, without skips or retries. The final screenshot shows Cancelled, a paused subtree, retained input, and no error toast. - Two new actual-service regressions fail before the merge fix. They prove that queued-comment adoption could consume a dedicated chat answer or add unrelated input to that answer. The fixed four-case cohort passes, including ordinary upstream continuation and adapter Stop controls. Full recovery passes 257/257. All four actual local process/ACP Stop browser flows pass in 1.4 minutes, without skips or retries, on a fresh database. - The unchanged runner artifact was qualified with 171/171 transport tests, 870/870 API-authority tests, conformance 1/1, and replay 11/11. Six controlled reader tests prove the exit/drain repair. Its local serial Rust workspace passed 546 top-level cases plus two invoked helpers; the later passing Linux CI supplies default-concurrency evidence. - Prior exact-source full chat integration passes 995/995. Settings regressions cover concurrent stale pages, 501 destinations, pending state, rejected updates, and explicit retry. These deterministic tests do not prove live provider behavior. - Retained failed attempts and their causes are in the [qualification log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-chat-queue-and-webhook-repair.md). The first merge adapter run timed out while macOS slept for 290 seconds. Its unchanged repeat passed with a temporary sleep guard. No assertion, deadline, or CI gate was weakened. Review commands include `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-process-recovery.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-queued-comments-routes.test.ts` and `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/acp-stop-continuation.spec.ts`. Database suites require fresh disposable databases. See the [browser runbook](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-04-chat-adapters-browser-e2e-runbook.md) for provider setup and separate live acceptance steps. ## Risks - This remains experimental. Deterministic tests and bounded live evidence do not establish every provider feature, tenant, permission layout, or media shape. Teams work-tenant qualification is still open. - Failed and uncertain provider effects remain visible and can require operator action. A transport receipt does not prove recipient visibility. - Native controller and runner artifacts must remain compatible. Preserve lease ownership, terminal authority, source binding, and quarantine during future changes. - Access and audit rows commit together, but activity notifications remain best-effort. This is not a new durable event outbox. - The PR operation does not deploy a live server, replace its runner, or change provider permissions. Remaining live qualification is documented in the [temporary handoff](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/afe19299d06253cb628eb398e91d1200ea9f412a/doc/plans/chat-adapters/2026-09-08-open-qualification-followups.md). ## Model Used OpenAI Codex assisted with implementation, tool execution, testing, and review. The work records `gpt-6-astra` assistance. The environment does not report a context-window size. No private reasoning traces are included. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
2a05b5ed34 |
ci: split runner verification from build (#13142)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Paperclip uses GitHub Actions to verify changes before release. > - The Paperclip Runner has a separate verification boundary. > - The build job currently runs this verification before the workspace build. > - This pull request moves runner verification into its own parallel job. > - The benefit is clearer CI results and less wait time for independent work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The trusted PR and release verification workflows run Paperclip Runner verification inside the Build job. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting (GitHub Actions CI workflows). **Current behavior** The Build job runs `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all` before it builds the workspace. A runner verification failure appears as a Build failure. The workspace build cannot run in parallel with runner verification. **Proposed behavior** Each workflow has a `Verify Paperclip Runner` job with the same checkout, dependency install, and command. The Build job only builds its required outputs. Both jobs run after the same gate and policy jobs. **Reason and benefit** The runner command is an independent verification boundary. A dedicated job gives it a clear status and allows it to run in parallel with Build. **Breaking changes** None. The same runner verification command still runs in both workflows. ## What Changed - Added a dedicated `Verify Paperclip Runner` job to the trusted PR workflow. - Added a dedicated `Verify Paperclip Runner` job to the release verification workflow. - Kept the Build jobs independent and retained their existing build commands. - Updated the trusted-workflow policy test for the additional dependency-install job. ## Verification - Ran `git diff --check`. - Ran `node --test ./scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs`. - Ran `pnpm exec prettier --check .github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml .github/workflows/release-verify.yml`. - Confirmed both jobs retain their prior runner, dependency, and policy prerequisites. ## Risks Low risk. The runner verification job repeats the existing setup. It adds one parallel GitHub Actions runner to each affected workflow. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, 128k context window, reasoning and tool-use capabilities. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
2ceb630b6c |
fix(workspaces): preserve dependency provisioning failures (#13093)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip runs agent work in isolated worktrees. > - Each worktree needs dependencies that match its source and patches. > - A failed install currently loses its exit status after an `if` statement. > - The provisioner can then record a successful dependency fingerprint. > - This pull request preserves failures and bounds lockfile recovery. > - Agents receive a usable workspace or an accurate provisioning failure. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A nonzero pnpm install could return success and save a fingerprint. Patch changes alone also did not invalidate the fingerprint. **Expected behavior:** Fail provisioning on an unsuccessful install. Retry known frozen-lockfile mismatches once and record success only after installation succeeds. **Steps to reproduce:** Run the provisioner in a worktree with a pnpm install that exits nonzero. The regression suite uses real shell execution and a controlled pnpm fixture. **Paperclip version or commit:** Reproduced on master before this change. **Deployment mode:** Self-hosted. **Installation method:** Git checkout. **Agent adapters involved:** Core workspace provisioning. **Database mode:** Not relevant. **Access context:** Execution host. **Node.js version:** 26.4.0 locally; supported minimum remains unchanged. **Operating system:** macOS locally and Linux execution hosts. **Relevant logs or output:** `ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH`, `ERR_PNPM_OUTDATED_LOCKFILE`, and ordinary installation failures. **Additional context:** Related lockfile maintenance: #13061. No lockfile or workflow changes are included. ## What Changed - Capture the failed install status inside the `else` branch. - Use the existing single retry for both frozen-lockfile mismatch errors. - Include patch contents in the dependency fingerprint. - Add executable regression coverage and document the behavior. ## Verification - All CI checks passed, including build, typecheck, tests, browser suites, canary dry run, and security scans. Greptile: 5/5 with no remaining findings. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/provision-worktree-self-heal.test.mjs`: 19 passed; one existing test requires Linux flock and was skipped on macOS. - `bash -n scripts/provision-worktree.sh` and `git diff --check` passed. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed in the companion runner-fix worktree at the same base revision. This change only touches shell provisioning, its tests, and documentation. - CI and review are pending. ## Risks The existing non-frozen recovery can update a worktree-local lockfile. Committed lockfile updates remain bot-owned. Ordinary failures now correctly stop provisioning and may expose previously hidden installation problems. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with code editing, shell execution, tests, and browser inspection. The exact model variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
af8439a70b |
feat(runner): restore direct live eval campaigns and reports (#12909)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Runner executes agents through native and managed provider drivers. > - The direct live eval layer had drifted from the current Runner contracts. > - The old local workflow did not provide a complete parallel campaign or durable report history. > - The Runner also needed current native OpenCode and OpenRouter qualification. > - This pull request restores the direct campaign, corrects the runtime gaps that the campaign found, and adds safe hosted Evalbook history. > - The benefit is repeatable model comparison against an immutable Runner and eval source revision. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11297 Refs #11634 **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the direct live `paperclip-runner` eval workflow, provider execution contract, and static Evalbook reporting path. **Current behavior** The direct evals do not have one maintained full campaign on current `master`. OpenCode has no qualified multi-model OpenRouter roster. Parallel provider bursts can compact committed events before the transport observes them. Local reports do not have a separate safe S3 history index. **Proposed behavior** Run one immutable roster-plus-case matrix. Use the shared paid AWS runner fleet. Keep raw artifacts access-controlled. Publish a sanitized canonical Evalbook report under the separate `runner-protocol-evals` S3 prefix. Keep immutable campaign directories plus root history, latest, and latest-green pointers. **Reason and benefit** Maintainers can compare native Codex, native OpenCode, ACPX, Claude Managed, and AWS AgentCore behavior over time. They can inspect failures without mixing this direct protocol layer with browser full-stack E2E. **Breaking changes** None. The new workflow and S3 prefix are additive. The existing Runner full-stack E2E workflow and report remain separate. ## What Changed - Added a trusted two-shard direct live workflow for up to 393 roster-plus-case cells. - Reused the numeric actor allowlist, protected paid environment, and RunsOn fleet controls from Runner full-stack E2E. - Added immutable Runner and eval revision resolution, exact credential boundaries, bounded retries, and cost ceilings. - Added a public report projection that removes sessions, transcripts, tool payloads, state, traces, raw failures, remote profile identities, and credential-shaped values. - Added additive S3 history under `runner-protocol-evals`, with immutable campaigns and mutable root index pointers. - Added native OpenCode model injection and current OpenRouter pricing contracts. - Fixed direct eval completion, workflow execution, semantic discovery, warm-attach state reset, executable binding, and event-burst handling. - Kept Runner browser full-stack E2E behavior and publication separate. - Documented local and hosted direct eval operation. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:runner-protocol-eval-publish` — 15 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build:typescript` — passed. - `actionlint .github/workflows/runner-protocol-live-evals.yml .github/workflows/runner-full-stack-e2e.yml` — passed. - Local current matrix at the revision in [paperclip-evals#17](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip-evals/pull/17) — 323 cells across 10 enabled configurations completed. - Final local current matrix — 269 passed, 11 behavior failures, and 43 expected macOS-only ACPX platform failures. - Targeted Runner checks — 13/13 eval-session tests, 15/15 publisher/security tests, and package typecheck passed; complete PR CI is green, including all browser E2E shards. ## Risks - Paid live campaigns can consume provider budget. Actor authorization, exact per-cell ceilings, protected environments, and explicit schedule enablement bound this risk. - Public reports can leak provider data. The workflow publishes only a separately projected report and validates every file before upload. - The new workflow cannot publish until it is present on the default branch. This pull request does not change the existing `runner-full-stack-e2e` publication path. - The campaign is large. It uses two GitHub matrices and caps combined concurrency at the shared fleet limit. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex on GPT-5. The exact deployment ID and context-window size are not exposed. The model used reasoning, code editing, browser inspection, repository tools, and live provider execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
bb920fb859 |
ci: keep the Docker build context complete and guard it on every PR (#12855)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - GitHub Actions builds the Docker images that ship Paperclip, and downstream deployments consume the `-cloud` image variant on every master merge. > - PR #12769 slimmed the Docker build context with a broad `.dockerignore` block for `packages/paperclip-runner`, and the block also removed three files the image build itself reads. > - The image build re-runs the runner's generated-file drift checks, so it found no committed capability contract in the context and failed on every master commit after the merge. > - PR CI never runs those checks against the Docker context, so the pull request stayed green and the breakage only appeared post-merge, on every image build. > - This pull request restores the three files with narrow `.dockerignore` exceptions and adds a PR CI job that runs the drift checks against the exact Docker build context. > - The benefit is that image publishing works again now, and the next context-slimming regression fails the pull request instead of every post-merge image build. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12769 (the context-slimming change that exposed this) and #12608 (which committed the generated contract outputs the image build checks). **What happened?** Every `Docker` workflow run on master failed from 2026-09-04 12:58Z onward, in both the `build-and-push` and `build-and-push-cloud` jobs. The failing step reported `Generated contract drift: generated/capability/capability-contract.md` from `check:capability-contract` inside `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`. The committed contract file is current — regeneration on a full checkout is a no-op. The file was simply absent from the build context: the new `packages/paperclip-runner/**/*.md` ignore rule strips the committed drift-check outputs (`generated/capability/capability-contract.md`, `generated/capability/downstream-handoff.md`), and the `packages/paperclip-runner/docs` rule also strips `docs/capability-contract.md`, which `check:capability-inventory` reads next in the chain. No cloud image published for eight hours, which stalled every downstream deployment that consumes the canary images. **Expected behavior** The Docker build context must contain every file the image build reads, and a change that removes one must fail the pull request that introduces it, not every image build after the merge. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Check out master at any commit from `af3023f1` onward. 2. Run `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile .` (the probe added by this PR), or start the real `Docker` workflow build. 3. Observe `Generated contract drift: generated/capability/capability-contract.md` — while `node packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/generate-capability-contract.mjs --check` passes on the same checkout outside Docker. **Paperclip version or commit** `d593463ab` (master tip at diagnosis time; first failing commit `af3023f1`). **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions image builds (`docker.yml`), consumed by managed cloud deployments. ## What Changed - `.dockerignore`: narrow exceptions (last match wins) re-include the committed drift-check outputs (`!packages/paperclip-runner/generated/**`) and the inventory check's documentation input (`!packages/paperclip-runner/docs/capability-contract.md`). Every other exclusion from #12769 stays: no crate declares an explicit `[[test]]` target, so cargo builds without the `tests` directories, and the image build chain never runs the excluded smoke scripts. - `.github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile` (new): a small probe that COPYs the real build context — identical `.dockerignore` semantics — and runs the dependency-independent drift checks inside it (`generate-capability-contract.mjs --check`, `check-capability-inventory.mjs`). ajv installs in an isolated directory for schema validation only; codegen checks such as `generate-protocol-schema-module` stay out because their emitted bytes vary with the ajv release and would raise false drift alarms outside the locked dependency tree. - `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: new `docker_context_integrity` job builds the probe on every full-CI pull request, and the existing `verify` aggregate now requires its result, so the guard gates merges through the same required check as the other lanes. - Activation note: `pr.yml` pins `pr-trusted.yml` by commit SHA, so the new job starts gating pull requests after the usual follow-up `ci: activate ...` pin bump once this merges. The `.dockerignore` fix needs no activation — `docker.yml` reads it directly, so image builds recover on the first master commit after this merges. ## Verification - `docker buildx build -f .github/docker-context-checks.Dockerfile .` on master (before the `.dockerignore` fix): fails with the exact production error, `Generated contract drift: generated/capability/capability-contract.md`. - Same command with the `.dockerignore` exceptions applied: passes, which also proves BuildKit honors the `!` exceptions, including the file inside the excluded `docs` directory. - `node scripts/generate-capability-contract.mjs --check` on a full checkout: passes both before and after, which confirms the committed contract was never stale — only missing from the context. - Static sweep of every script in the image build chain (`build`, `build:typescript` and their `check:*` steps) against the ignore rules: the three restored files are the only build inputs the #12769 block strips. - YAML for `pr-trusted.yml` lints clean. ## Risks - Low. The `.dockerignore` exceptions only re-add three committed files to the build context; image contents do not change otherwise. - The probe job adds one context transfer and two Node scripts per full-CI pull request run (about one to two minutes, no dependency install beyond one isolated ajv package). - The `verify` aggregate now also requires the new job, mirroring the existing pattern for the other lanes; on non-full-CI runs the job skips and `verify` asserts the skip, unchanged from how the other lanes behave. - The new job only takes effect for pull requests after a follow-up pin bump in `pr.yml` (same two-step flow as every `pr-trusted.yml` change). > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic, model id `claude-fable-5`), extended thinking, agentic tool use in Claude Code: GitHub Actions log forensics to isolate the failing check, static analysis of the build-chain scripts against the ignore rules, and local docker buildx runs to reproduce the failure and verify the fix. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (the docker probe, both failing-before and passing-after; the drift checks themselves on a full checkout) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (the probe IS the regression test for this class) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (inline comments in `.dockerignore` and the probe explain the invariant) - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Dotta
|
4ef6155aae |
ci: harden paid runner browser and lock repair (#12829)
## Thinking Path Paid cells now reuse the AWS image's system Chrome, but Playwright video recording still resolves its revision-pinned FFmpeg helper from the Playwright cache. Run 33875618534 proved Chrome qualification succeeds and then failed before provider startup because that helper was absent. The same run also exposed that generic lock repair can churn unrelated package platform metadata, so the automated repair paths need resolution-only regeneration rather than lockfile-only metadata refresh. ## What Changed - install Playwright FFmpeg only on the AWS/system-Chrome path - retry the small helper installation up to three times before provider secrets are exposed - keep the GitHub-hosted Chromium fallback unchanged - bind static coverage to the exact FFmpeg step block and its pre-secret ordering - add pnpm `--resolution-only` to all four automated lock-repair paths while retaining full transitive resolution - require resolution-only repair in the shared workflow regression The actual generated lockfile correction remains bot-owned by PR #12828 and is intentionally not committed here. ## Verification - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-workflows.test.mjs` - `actionlint -ignore SC2012` on all modified workflows - focused Prettier checks - `git diff --check` - prior run 33875618534: system Chrome 151 qualified; missing Playwright FFmpeg was the sole cell startup failure ## Risks Low. The new network operation is limited to Playwright's pinned FFmpeg payload, happens before paid credentials are exposed, and leaves the hosted-runner path unchanged. Resolution-only is still a full dependency-resolution pass, unlike lockfile-only, while avoiding unrelated current-platform metadata churn. ## Model Used GPT-5 |
||
|
|
fa16f88d6b |
chore(lockfile): refresh pnpm-lock.yaml (#12771)
Use full dependency resolution in automated lockfile repair paths, add regression coverage, and refresh the stale Rollup snapshot. Co-Authored-By: Dotta <cryppadotta@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: Codex <codex@openai.com> Co-Authored-By: lockfile-bot <lockfile-bot@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
87d05e194b |
feat(work-products): add rich cards and run artifact inventory (#12717)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Agent outputs must remain visible after a run and easy to inspect from a task. > - The thread and artifact inventory need one consistent rich-card vocabulary. > - Run uploads also need durable artifact registration and producing-run context. > - Reviewers need deterministic examples for each rich-card kind and state. > - This pull request adds the shared presentation, registration, inventory, and Storybook review coverage. > - The benefit is a complete output path that reviewers can inspect without seeded data. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** This change improves work-product presentation in task threads and the task Artifacts tab. **Subsystem affected** The change affects shared work-product contracts, the runner diff path, server attachment and work-product services, GitHub metadata refresh, the React board UI, and Storybook. **Current behavior** The thread used generic cards. Some files uploaded by a run existed only as message attachments. The Artifacts tab showed a flat list without run context or filters. Storybook showed only one resting card per kind. **Proposed behavior** The thread uses rich cards for supported work-product types. Each run-produced file registers one attachment-backed artifact work product. The Artifacts tab groups outputs by run and supports filters. Storybook shows every kind and requested state, PR lifecycle states, stats variants, truncation, mobile layout, and message-tail media. **Reason and benefit** Users can identify outputs quickly. Reviewers can inspect all card permutations without creating task data. **Breaking changes** None. The metadata fields and automatic artifact registration are additive. Existing attachments and work products keep their current behavior. ## What Changed - Added a shared rich work-product card with kind-specific content and a compact inventory variant. - Added pull-request and commit diff metadata plus bounded GitHub state refresh. - Added media strips and typed file chips to message-tail attachments. - Registered each run-produced attachment as an artifact work product in the same server transaction. - Grouped task artifacts by run with agent and timestamp headings. - Added type and run filters, image thumbnails, compact cards, and a company Artifacts link. - Added a Storybook kind-by-state matrix with stats variants for all eight visual kinds. - Added PR open, draft, merged, and closed examples, long-title truncation, an exact 375-pixel viewport, and message-tail overflow coverage. - Closed reconciled runtime work products when the linked runtime stops or disappears, so the card shows `Stopped` instead of `Unhealthy`. ### Screenshots Before: one resting card per kind.  After: the kind and state matrix.  After: message-tail media at 375 pixels.  [Open the Storybook evidence viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-work-product-storybook-20260902/). The earlier artifact inventory comparison remains available in the [artifact inventory viewer](https://pages.paperclip.ing/rich-artifacts-inventory-proof-20260902/). ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - `pnpm build-storybook` passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/work-product-runtime-reconciliation.test.ts` passed with 5 tests. - Chromium visual checks passed at desktop and 375-pixel widths. - All 30 latest-head GitHub checks passed. One unrelated annotation test was flaky and passed on its single retry. - Greptile passed at 5/5 with zero unresolved threads. ## Risks - Low risk. The Storybook change adds review fixtures only. The runtime fix changes read-time reconciliation without database writes. - The matrix is intentionally large so every permutation stays visible in one review surface. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This work does not duplicate planned core work. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5 and GPT-5.6-sol across this pull request. Reasoning, tool use, and code execution were enabled. The context-window size is not exposed. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My public branch name describes the change and contains no internal task id - [x] I have run tests locally and the changed-path tests pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
5716fe907e |
test(runner): add full-stack acceptance and eval gates (#12700)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner subsystem executes agent work across local and managed provider backends. > - The lower pull requests restore the task runtime, provider backends, and managed-provider control plane. > - The restored system needs repeatable full-stack checks before it can ship safely. > - Paid live checks also need clear access, cost, and secret controls. > - This pull request adds acceptance, live evaluation, chaos, and release gates for the restored runner stack. > - The benefit is measurable runner parity with safer release decisions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting. This change covers runner tests, release workflows, server contracts, and evaluation tools. **Problem or motivation** The runner stack did not have one complete acceptance surface for native Codex, ACPX, Claude Managed, and AWS AgentCore. Release checks could miss provider drift, task-view regressions, cost-policy errors, and destructive cleanup errors. **Proposed solution** Add a 57-cell full-stack catalog, a Daytona image, and opt-in paid workflows. Add live evaluation, chaos, cost-limit, redaction, and release contract checks. Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure and guarded provisioning tools. Keep the native runner experimental flag off by default. **Alternatives considered** We considered manual smoke tests only. They do not give repeatable evidence and they do not protect release branches. We also considered one large pull request. The stacked pull requests keep each review below the Greptile file limit. **Roadmap alignment** This work supports the shipped Cloud / Sandbox agents milestone and the shipped Agent evals & feedback milestone in `ROADMAP.md`. Related stack: - #12699 adds managed provider backends and lifecycle support. - #12691 adds qualified OpenCode and ACPX provider backends. - #12685 restores task runtime rendering and steering. ## What Changed - Add the runner full-stack harness with 57 catalog cells and 60 unit tests. - Add a Daytona runner image with digest-pinned base images and base-aware image-content checks. - Add guarded live evaluation and chaos workflows with a fixed 40-execution matrix; live and full-stack paid schedules now run only on Sundays or by manual dispatch. - Add in-flight reported-usage cost stops, post-turn cost caps, exact-threshold failure classification, secret redaction, retry classification, and actor authorization. - Reattach stream and hard-budget listeners before restart-recovery continuations so restored paid sessions cannot bypass in-flight interruption. - Preserve OpenCode usage and cost across tool-loop messages and turns while exposing an explicit current-run delta to durable accounting. - Keep PNG/WebM evidence in access-controlled artifacts only, reject SVG, and publish only pruned inert structured per-attempt evidence. - Add AWS AgentCore infrastructure, provisioning checks, and smoke tools; reject unsafe model identifiers, require exact stack ownership markers, and make failed-stack replacement explicit. - Add evaluation-session contracts and capability reports. - Add release workflow checks for immutable action pins, frozen dependency installs, exact weekly cron shape, paid-run guards, provider-secret isolation, and chaos test paths. - Reauthorize the original and triggering numeric actor IDs as the first step of every provider-secret job, including partial reruns, before checkout or provider access. - Give each full-stack matrix cell only its matching provider credential, expose Daytona only to Daytona cells, and disable shared dependency caches anywhere paid credentials or OIDC write access are present. - Protect the legacy manual E2E workflow with the same default-branch, allowlist, environment, and per-job authorization boundary. - Rotate live-eval candidates by week and retain 120 days of compatible history so the seven-week trend window remains viable. - Restore the root runner-acceptance commands and reconcile reported snapshots, raw receipts, and terminal usage without double counting or losing late usage. - Mark ACPX token deltas exact only when every budget field is present, keep cumulative cost/request authority separate, reject non-USD cost labeling, and include thought tokens in output-token budgets. - Keep `enableNativeRunner` off by default. The acceptance harness enables it only in its isolated test instance. ## Verification Passed locally: - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner typecheck` - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance:typecheck` - `pnpm test:runner-acceptance` (19 tests) - focused OpenCode proxy, driver, runnerd transport, live-session, and turn-stream tests (106 tests) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner exec vitest run src/live/clean-room-server.test.ts` (22 tests) - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck` - `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (62 tests) - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner test:runner-workflow-evals` (22 tests) - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `node --test packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/aws-agentcore-provisioning.test.mjs` (6 tests) - `git diff --check` - `cargo test --manifest-path packages/paperclip-runner/runner/Cargo.toml -p paperclip-runner-core --lib --locked` (161 tests) - focused ACPX provider-event tests (10 tests) - The rebased PR changes 92 files. `pnpm-lock.yaml` is unchanged. I did not run paid live provider jobs or provision AWS resources. Those checks need credentials and can create cost. ## Risks The paid workflows can create provider cost. They require an allowlisted original and triggering actor, the protected `runner-e2e-paid` environment, explicit opt-in variables, and cost limits. The four provider credentials exist only in that master-only environment, which requires allowlisted reviewer approval and disables administrator bypass; repository and organization Actions scopes contain no copies. Provider usage arrives after a billable request, so the live guard cannot prevent one request from crossing a threshold. It interrupts immediately on the first reported threshold hit and permits no continuation. Visual evidence can contain secrets rendered as pixels. PNG/WebM remain only in access-controlled workflow artifacts; SVG and per-attempt XML are excluded, and S3/Pages receive a pruned structured dashboard. The AWS scripts can create cloud resources. They use explicit commands, least-privilege roles, KMS encryption, saved nonsecret metadata, and explicit teardown. This pull request does not enable the experimental native runner for existing instances. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The model used extended reasoning, tool use, code execution, and parallel subagents. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dda4dff645 |
fix(onboarding): restore browser launch and gate canaries (#12667)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The onboarding command starts the local server and opens the first-run wizard. > - Interactive onboarding stopped opening the browser by default. > - Organization creation could also succeed in the API while the wizard stayed on the name step. > - The npm canary workflow did not prove that the published package could complete this path. > - This pull request repairs the startup and organization transitions and adds an exact-version canary smoke gate. > - The benefit is a quickstart that works for users and is tested after each canary publish. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #12557 covers a separate final-route onboarding handoff. **What happened?** Interactive `paperclipai onboard` runs did not open the onboarding page. The organization API request could succeed while a same-company context update caused the wizard to stay on the organization step. The canary release lane did not test the exact published npm package through this path. **Expected behavior** Interactive onboarding must open the browser once. A successful organization request must advance to the first-agent step when the surrounding context adopts the same organization. Each published canary must install in a clean environment and reach the model connection step. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d /tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"` in an interactive terminal. 2. Enter an organization name while the company context refreshes from the create response. 3. Observe that the browser does not open or that the wizard can remain on the organization step after the API creates it. 4. Inspect the canary release lane and observe that no post-publish onboarding test runs against the exact npm version. **Paperclip version or commit** The issue reproduced with `2026.901.0-canary.8` and the source state before this pull request. **Deployment mode** Local trusted quickstart with embedded PostgreSQL. The install source can be npm or a source checkout. ## What Changed - Open the browser once for interactive foreground onboarding. - Preserve explicit browser opt-outs and restore the prior environment value after startup. - Accept a same-company context update after organization creation and reject a different-company takeover with an explicit error. - Export the exact canary version from the publish job. - Install and test that exact npm version in a clean Playwright smoke job through the "Connect a model" step. - Upload server logs, traces, screenshots, and the Playwright report when the canary smoke fails. - Document the interactive default and headless opt-outs. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/onboard.test.ts ui/src/components/OnboardingWizard.step.test.tsx --reporter=dot` passes with 37 tests. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` passes with 9 tests. - `pnpm exec playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts tests/e2e/onboarding.spec.ts` passes with 2 tests. - `PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=2026.901.0-canary.8 pnpm run test:canary-onboarding-smoke` passes against the published npm package. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passes. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - `pnpm build` passes. - A fresh interactive source run opens the browser and reaches "Connect a model" after organization and agent naming. ## Risks - Low risk. Automatic browser opening only applies to interactive foreground onboarding. - `PAPERCLIP_NO_BROWSER=1` and `PAPERCLIP_OPEN_ON_LISTEN=false` keep headless runs silent. - A different organization context still blocks the pending create transition. - The canary package is immutable before the smoke runs. A smoke failure leaves the package published but makes the release workflow red. - This change does not modify REST APIs, database schemas, or shared data types. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex based on GPT-5. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment snapshot or context-window size. The model used reasoning, browser automation, repository tools, shell commands, code editing, and test execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
39b8ee2960 |
ci: optimize checks for stacked pull requests (#12507)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses GitHub Actions to protect changes before they enter `master`. > - GitHub evaluates every pull request in a native stack against the stack base. > - The current workflow therefore starts the complete CI matrix for every layer in a stack. > - A large stack can queue many copies of the same integrated verification and delay every pull request. > - GitHub provides stack position and base metadata so workflows can select merge-relevant layers. > - This pull request keeps policy and required check names on every layer, but runs full CI only for ordinary pull requests, the top layer, and the lowest unmerged layer. > - The benefit is much lower CI load without weakening the required-check contract. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The trusted pull request workflow currently runs every test, build, canary, and E2E lane for every pull request in a native stack. **Subsystem affected** GitHub Actions pull request verification. **Current behavior** A stack with 61 pull requests can start 61 complete CI matrices after a cascading rebase. **Proposed behavior** Run the always-on policy job and stable required-check aggregators for every layer. Run the complete verification matrix only for ordinary pull requests, the top stack layer, and the lowest unmerged stack layer. **Reason and benefit** The top layer verifies the integrated stack. The lowest unmerged layer verifies the current merge candidate. Middle layers keep branch-protection checks without consuming the complete runner matrix. **Breaking changes** Middle stack layers no longer run the complete CI matrix. Their `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` checks still require the policy job to pass and require every expensive lane to be intentionally skipped. ## What Changed - Add a fail-safe stack scope decision to the trusted PR runner gate. - Run typecheck, general tests, build, serialized tests, canary, and E2E shards only for ordinary, top, and lowest-unmerged pull requests. - Preserve the required `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e` names on every layer. - Make the required aggregators distinguish valid middle-layer skips from failures or missing scope decisions. - Add regression coverage for ordinary, top, bottom, middle, and malformed stack metadata. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` — 11 tests passed. - `actionlint .github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml .github/workflows/pr.yml` — passed. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` — passed. - The caller remains pinned to the current trusted workflow. A separate activation change must advance the immutable SHA after this pull request lands. ## Risks - Incorrect stack classification could skip important jobs. Missing or malformed stack metadata defaults to full CI. - Middle-layer required checks depend on the policy job and verify that all expensive jobs have the `skipped` result. - The reusable workflow change does not become active until the immutable caller SHA advances in a separate change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. The exact deployment suffix and context window are not exposed. The model used reasoning, repository tools, code execution, Git, and GitHub API access. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
1da6b37fc5 |
fix(ci): regenerate stale stacked lockfiles (#12461)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses trusted GitHub Actions workflows to verify every pull request > - Native stacked pull requests use another pull request branch as their base > - A parent layer can change a package manifest without committing `pnpm-lock.yaml` > - A child layer can inherit that manifest change without changing a manifest itself > - The current policy skips lockfile regeneration for that child and downstream frozen installs fail > - This pull request validates the complete merge tree and shares a regenerated lockfile only when needed > - The benefit is reliable stacked pull request verification without weakening the trusted workflow boundary ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A stacked child pull request inherited a package manifest change from its parent. The child did not change a manifest itself. The policy job skipped lockfile regeneration. Downstream jobs tried to restore an artifact that did not exist and then failed during frozen dependency installation. **Expected behavior** The policy job must validate the complete pull request merge tree. It must upload a regenerated lockfile when the checked-in lockfile is stale, including on a stacked child layer. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a parent pull request that changes `package.json` without committing `pnpm-lock.yaml`. 2. Create a child pull request on that branch without another manifest change. 3. Run the trusted pull request workflow for the child. 4. Observe that frozen dependency installation fails because no `pr-lockfile` artifact exists. **Paperclip version or commit** `f173ee09fa5c2ced7806bba47b54c3df853ab4df` **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions trusted pull request workflow. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific. This is a core CI workflow bug. ## What Changed - Regenerate the lockfile from every checked-out merge tree. - Compare the generated lockfile with the checked-in copy before upload. - Download the artifact only when the policy job reports that it uploaded one. - Fail closed when a reported artifact is missing. - Add a workflow contract test for stacked lockfile handling. - Keep the caller pinned to the last merged trusted SHA; after this implementation merges, a separate activation PR will advance the immutable pin to its merge commit. ## Verification - `actionlint .github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml` - `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs` ## Risks - The policy job runs one lockfile-only install for every pull request. This can add a small amount of CI time. - A missing artifact now fails immediately when the policy job reports an upload. This is intentional because it exposes workflow corruption. - No runtime or product behavior changes. - The implementation/activation split is intentional: unmerged PR-authored workflow code must never execute on trusted runners. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with model `gpt-5`, reasoning, tool use, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
Dotta
|
c916af0cc0 |
ci: call trusted PR workflow (#12439)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses pull request CI to validate each proposed change > - The existing workflow defines every heavy job in a PR-controlled file > - A trusted reusable workflow now contains the synchronized CI definition > - The caller must use an immutable default-branch SHA > - This pull request replaces the duplicate job list with that pinned caller > - The benefit is automatic secure runner selection without workflow drift ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12436 Refs #12438 **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves how the pull request workflow selects trusted CI capacity. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting CI automation. **Current behavior** The active workflow contains a duplicate list of all heavy jobs. It cannot use the administrator-controlled runner gate. **Proposed behavior** The active workflow calls the synchronized trusted workflow at an immutable SHA. The trusted workflow selects GitHub-hosted or isolated AWS capacity from the validated contributor identity. **Reason and benefit** The thin caller prevents pull request changes from replacing the external-runner security gate. It also keeps runner selection automatic. **Breaking changes** The check names gain the reusable workflow job prefix. AWS routing remains disabled until the canary starts. ## What Changed - Replaced the duplicated heavy CI job list with one reusable-workflow call. - Pinned the call to the reviewed default-branch commit. - Limited the caller token to actions, contents, and pull request read access. ## Verification - actionlint on both workflow files - Trusted-routing tests - Confirmed the pinned SHA contains the workflow and is an ancestor of master - Full AWS and GitHub runner-boundary verification with routing disabled ## Risks The check context names change when GitHub expands the reusable workflow. The rollout verifies the new aggregate contexts before branch rules change. The repository kill switch remains off during this pull request. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5, tool use, and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either linked a related public PR or described the issue with the matching template fields - [x] I have not referenced internal or instance-local Paperclip issues or links - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [ ] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
