mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-21 00:05:49 +02:00
17c9b1fd62d032eec65ead79cc2d4d1c8e966b17
5132
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
17c9b1fd62 |
fix(workspaces): validate prospective child source trust
Pass server-owned creation context before the child is saved. Validate the creator run, sponsor and parent ancestry against the immutable boundary, then verify current parent and prospective child policies. Preserve exact saved task identity for ordinary selection and writes. Add real database and authenticated HTTP regressions, including omitted client policy, and update the plan and paired workspace maps. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
bc6e216629 |
test(chat): restore DOM environment for execution defaults
Preserve the Vitest environment directive required by DOM interaction tests. Prose comment cleanup must not remove test-runner configuration. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3452c67d86 |
refactor(workspaces): isolate source identity and align review fixtures
Extract source-root identity helpers and split policy regression suites. Preserve behavior while applying current contributor source rules and reconcile Storybook execution-default fixtures and catalog dependencies. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4817df3e82 |
fix(workspaces): fence pending choices and sandbox source aliases
Advance the task CAS revision when accepting a pending workspace choice so superseded retries cannot replace newer intent. Preserve active run roots. Validate physical source trust before copying, admission and publication, including retained readers and standard runs without a saved policy. Defer isolation proof until all checks pass. Disable configured and builtin host provisioning for low-trust sandbox worktree creation, reuse and rebuild. Recognize primary separate Git storage without probing unrelated company history, and document workspace run-log measurements and policy semantics. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b5046ec022 |
Merge master to refresh trusted PR CI
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
88bf4c6c1d |
refactor(storybook): organize folders and navigation by feature map (#16049)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The feature map describes product areas and verification entry points. > - Storybook has 223 story suites that show production components, proposals, and retained history. > - The parent PR maps those suites to features, but their folders and sidebar still use unrelated groups. > - This pull request puts the existing suites under feature folders and uses the feature map's names and order in the sidebar. > - Explicit meta IDs preserve existing story links while the titles change. > - Contributors can find stories through the same product structure without losing examples. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16046. This is the requested follow-up. Parent #16046 is merged. This PR now targets master, with its single follow-up commit rebased onto the parent squash merge. The Storybook implementation is unchanged by that rebase. Related open Storybook PRs were checked; this change organizes existing suites and adds no product capability. ## What Changed - Move all 223 story files into folders named for their primary feature area. Keep useful scenario groups below the feature's sidebar label. - Order the sidebar by the eight feature-map sections. Put Overview first and shared Foundations last. Leave areas with no stories out of the sidebar. - Move 19 support files into `ui/storybook/support/` and update relative imports and active documentation. - Preserve all 2,210 story IDs and the single docs ID through explicit CSF meta IDs. Keep all entry names and story exports. - Record stable IDs and sidebar titles in the downstream catalog. Validate feature folders, title prefixes, and IDs. Update the maintenance skill and review evidence. ## Verification - Storybook build passed. Built index comparison against parent `75bd3c977cd828d5222823850339e8204f40eb47` found the same 2,211 entries, IDs, and names. - UI typecheck passed (`ui/node_modules/.bin/tsc -b` from `ui`, invoked as `./node_modules/.bin/tsc -b`). - UI Vitest project: 728 files and 8,176 tests passed. - Catalog checker and its nine tests passed. Feature-map checks, token gates, and the maintenance-skill validator passed. - Chromium: nine existing play cases and one render case reached `storyFinished: success` with no page exceptions. The guide rendered, sidebar sections followed map order, and a search for `steering/queue` opened its preserved story link. - Source comparison found only meta title/ID changes, rebased relative references, and updated fixture path text in story files. - To inspect: build Storybook, start `node scripts/serve-storybook-static.mjs --port 6136`, and open the Overview guide. Expand feature folders and use existing story links. - The complete repository suite was not repeated for this organization change. The parent records a backend timeout that passed in isolation, without a complete broad-suite pass. Visual comparisons remain blocked by the unpublished empty baseline. The separate fixture-server story was not run. ## Risks - Open branches that add stories under old paths will need to choose a feature folder and update the catalog. Cross-feature suites have one primary home and retain related capability references. - Sidebar paths change; story and docs IDs remain stable. Automated references to source paths may need the new location. - This is one requested follow-up with 258 changed files, mostly moves. It exceeds the usual review-size guideline because splitting it would leave the sidebar and folder convention partly migrated. - Browser verification samples ten stories, not all 2,210. Existing production/prototype classifications and review gaps remain unchanged. - Required CI gates and a 5/5 review passed on the original head. Fresh checks and review are running for the rebased head. Catalog validation and all nine checker tests passed after rebase; UI, map, skill, and checker contents are identical to the original reviewed head. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and local browser automation. ## 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> |
||
|
Dotta
|
eecbdb67e2 | Merge branch 'master' into codex/task-workspace-ownership | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
dabb8c5daf |
test: remove repeated setup and strengthen regression proof (#16022)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its tests protect company boundaries, approvals, durable tasks, credentials and the board UI. > - Several owner suites repeat large database fixtures and render frames. > - Some tests repeat stronger proof or pass when the behavior they describe is broken. > - This pull request shares exact setup, removes proven duplicate cases and repairs weak observations. > - It preserves distinct security, lifecycle, concurrency and user-facing contracts. > - The benefit is 5,027 fewer test lines and stronger regression checks. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15978. This continues the merged test-audit cleanup in [PR #15978](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/15978), which removed 11,976 test/support lines. The savings in this pull request are additional. Related open work: [PR #13460](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13460) changes legacy OAuth parent/version lock ordering. This pull request retains those production paths and the existing lock-order test. Its secrets changes compact fixtures and repair the two AWS wrapper exclusion observations. Scoped title searches found no open duplicate audit or fixture-consolidation PR and no matching audit issue. The problem is described here using the enhancement template. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The maintenance and regression value of the existing server, UI, CLI, shared and wiki-plugin test suites. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting test code. Two UI modules also lose unused test inspection exports. **Current behavior** Owner tests repeat database rows, service inputs, HTTP setup and render frames. Some cases repeat stronger assertions. Two AWS lock tests record only cleanup events, so an AWS provider write can happen inside the held lock without failing those observations. Several other negative tests accept or do not observe the wrong result. Worktree fixtures also use a temporary path alias that conflicts with the existing canonical-path checks on macOS. **Proposed behavior** Use small local helpers that preserve exact inputs, fresh allocations, callbacks, query order and await positions. Remove only cases with named stronger keepers. Tighten negative assertions and observe actual AWS provider entry while a confirmed lock holder remains parked. Resolve temporary fixture roots to their canonical paths. **Reason and benefit** Remove 5,027 net test lines and 15 redundant registered executions. Remove 11 lines of unused UI inspection exports. Keep every distinct company, actor, approval, credential, persistence, stale-write and concurrency contract. No wall-time speedup is claimed for setup compaction. **Breaking changes** None for application behavior, APIs or stored data. The removed exports expose private UI test state and have no remaining callers. ## What Changed - Consolidate repeated runtime, workspace, portability, route, tool-access, policy, gateway and state-service fixtures. - Share repeated UI render frames and CLI/wiki-plugin setup while retaining the original actions and expected results. - Remove 15 repeated case executions only where the audit records an exact stronger keeper. - Repair weak HTTP/UI negative assertions and two AWS account-home lock observations. Keep the existing durable results and cleanup behavior. - Remove the unused `__inflightGetCount` and `__secondTickInternals` inspection exports. Keep observable request coalescing and ticker lifecycle checks. - Canonicalize temporary worktree fixture paths without weakening production path checks. - Record the owner decisions, savings, independent preservation reviews and validation in [the dated audit report](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-rounds.md) and [the compact control evidence](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa/doc/plans/2026-10-12-test-audit-controls.json). ## Verification - Complete owner and retained-sibling baselines passed before each audit cutover. Independent reviewers checked the full original tests, actual helper bodies, exact inputs, receipt provenance, async order, fresh allocations and case registrations. - All 14 UI/route/wiki mutations failed at their intended assertions: ten UI/API/ticker controls, one route control and three wiki persistence/receipt controls. Each mutated production source was restored to its exact original bytes. - Both old AWS lock tests passed with their respective AWS-only lock bypass. Both repaired tests failed at the intended assertions with the same bypasses. These give 16 intended failures and two passing weak controls across 18 executions. Each source was restored exactly. - Final complete state-owner/sibling run: 329/329 passed at code revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`. - Final `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm check:token-gates` and `pnpm build`: passed at the same code revision. - Delivery head `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` includes the evidence commit and master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded`. All 27 audited test files and both application files match the locally verified code revision byte-for-byte. Current-head CI validates the integrated branch, including the incoming master changes. - All eight production-owner SHA guards for the 16 deliberate failing mutation controls still match the integrated delivery checkout. The mutation receipts therefore apply to those current owners. - Full default `pnpm test:run`: **failed** with exit 1 at frozen code revision `64370831ebe191e5ce092f85f79b6fb661df7e16`; HEAD and tracked source bytes remained unchanged. The first general-server group reported 878 passing files, four failing files and six skipped files; 17,846 passing cases, 24 failing cases and 105 skipped cases. Later groups did not run. Failures were `http-log-redaction` (socket hangup), `public-mcp` (initial 15-second timeout followed by hosted token “Refresh before subscribing” failures), `remove-test-home` (macOS `ENOTEMPTY` where permission errors were expected, plus cleanup failure), and `workspace-git-snapshot-streaming` (300-second timeout). All four failing test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP production owners are unchanged by this audit. Full local success is not claimed. - Focused complete-owner diagnosis at the same frozen revision: 149/152 passed, three failed, zero skipped. `public-mcp` passed 82/82 and `http-log-redaction` passed 66/66 unchanged. The two `remove-test-home` cases reproduced macOS `ENOTEMPTY` against an expected `EACCES`/`EPERM` contract; the 32 MiB workspace snapshot case reproduced its existing 300,000 ms timeout. HEAD and tracked files stayed clean. Exact blob comparison confirmed all four test files and the relevant cleanup/MCP owners match both inspected master `4b766b872993045a2e787404f0475503683e5ded` and the frozen local revision. The three remaining local failures are unresolved; no timeout, retry or assertion was weakened. - Current-head CI: [workflow 38299262149](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38299262149) has passed runner selection and created all downstream test/typecheck/build gates; those gates are queued, with no failures reported. Greptile completed successfully at `58c5c4aa241c85f4665a3159c192888bbb2a5cfa` with [5/5 and zero comments](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16022#issuecomment-6131457592). All review threads are resolved or absent. This pull request will remain open after verification. Reviewers can reproduce the required workspace checks: ```sh pnpm -r typecheck pnpm check:token-gates pnpm test:run pnpm build ``` Browser suites were not run. Their sources and user journeys are unchanged by this audit. ## Risks - A fixture helper can hide a specialized input or change object freshness. Full-program expansion checks and independent reviews preserve the exact old inputs and execution order. - Removing duplicate proof can remove a distinct contract by mistake. The audit records the keeper for each deletion; all distinct security and lifecycle cases remain. - Concurrency checks can miss progress during a fixed delay. The AWS repairs record actual provider entry, confirm holder entry, use measured entry windows, require exact final event order and drain both operations in `finally`. - The full local default run failed. Focused diagnosis reproduced two macOS cleanup failures and one existing snapshot timeout in unchanged owners; these remain unresolved. Current-head CI is pending. No test deadline, retry policy, skip or CI shard was weakened to obtain a pass. > 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-6, reasoning, repository inspection, code execution and delegated audit/review. The runtime does not expose the exact served model identifier or context-window size; those values are unavailable and are not inferred from the model catalog. ## 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 - [ ] 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
|
9e721264e9 |
feat: maintain Storybook through a downstream feature catalog (#16046)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Storybook supports review of its production UI and proposed designs. > - Its 223 story files have no consistent link to product capabilities or record of component and mock provenance. > - Old compositions can drift while they still look like current product examples. > - This pull request adds two maintenance skills and a catalog that consumes the existing feature map. > - The first audit preserves all stories and fixes proven fixture drift. > - Contributors can now find examples by feature and see what still needs review. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Storybook maintenance, feature discovery, and the accuracy of isolated UI examples. **Current behavior** Stories are already centralized under `ui/storybook/`, but their sidebar has 51 top-level groups. Production components, local prototypes, and historical designs are not consistently distinguished. The old guide uses manual coverage claims. GitHub searches found no duplicate feature-map catalog change. **Proposed behavior** Keep existing story locations and IDs. Add a downstream catalog keyed to stable feature capabilities. Record product status, rendered subject, data boundary, and declared review dependencies separately. Use dedicated maintenance and review skills to reconcile drift and report evidence. **Reason and benefit** The catalog makes existing examples reusable without treating mock behavior or old designs as production acceptance. The feature map remains independent of Storybook. ## What Changed - Add `maintain-storybook` and `review-storybook` skills with contributor guidance. - Inventory all 223 story files. Generate a feature index and provide searchable navigation in the existing Overview story. Track direct subjects through relative imports and local wrappers, including the primitives demonstrated by foundation suites. - Add a checker for inventory, capability references, duplicate IDs, and declared-source drift, with eight regression tests. The parser test covers real nested CSF files, export filters, explicit IDs, and play counts. - Preserve historical designs and classify mixed wrappers. Record the initial audit and remaining parity work. - Align the question-dismiss/send fixture with production behavior. Add dismissal and confirmation-reopen regressions and repair the editor selector. - Exclude three exported fast-response fixtures from story discovery and add the missing render-time callback spy. ## Verification - Passed: `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs`, `node --test scripts/storybook-catalog.test.mjs` (8 tests), and `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`. - Passed: validators for both new skills, `pnpm check:token-gates`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, and `pnpm build`. - Passed: final Storybook build; nine selected browser `play` cases; three fast-response render cases; feature-guide search/link navigation; question-fixture reset on reload. - Built-index comparison preserved all 2,208 original story IDs and added only two new regression cases. - Passed: `pnpm exec vitest run --project @paperclipai/ui` (728 files, 8,176 tests). - The full `pnpm test:run` has reported a 15-second timeout in the untouched backend case `connects advertised Workspace gmail.read without mutating definitions in authenticated`. The exact test passed standalone without changing code, expectations, or timeouts. The remaining broad run was stopped after this failure. The full suite is not verified. - Visual comparison is blocked by the existing empty baseline manifest. The managed-accounts API/DB fixture was not started. See `maps/storybook-map/REVIEW.md` for exact scope. ## Risks - This is an initial inventory and targeted audit. 188 suites still require deeper state and fixture parity review. - Review hashes cover declared dependencies. They do not follow all transitive production imports or prove semantic correctness. - The catalog requires upkeep when stories, mapped recipes, or declared subjects change. Shared mocks still need feature-by-feature contract review. - No production application source, database schema, or upstream feature-map contract changes. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. Used reasoning, shell tools, file editing, and Chromium browser verification. The exact runtime 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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f5346c05b9 |
ci: route PR admission through reserved AWS capacity (#16042)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip uses CI to verify changes before release.
> - Trusted PR tests can run on isolated AWS workers.
> - Their runner-selection job currently waits for GitHub-hosted
capacity.
> - A large hosted test queue therefore blocks admission to AWS.
> - A dedicated routing workflow lets us reserve capacity for metadata
validation.
> - This PR moves the routing job to reserved AWS capacity after the
bootstrap workflow and pool are available.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Issue type**
CI reliability enhancement.
**Where is the issue?**
The Select trusted runner job in PR CI.
**What's wrong?**
The routing job competes with a large hosted test queue. Its sampled
median wait was about 20 minutes. AWS tests cannot begin before this job
finishes.
**Suggested fix**
Add a protected reusable routing workflow. Deploy its dedicated AWS
pool, then switch the PR caller in a follow-up PR. No overlapping open
PR or issue was found.
## What Changed
- Call ci-routing.yml on protected master from pr-trusted.yml.
- Check the canonical repository and approved PR author/sender before
allocating reserved AWS metadata capacity. Unapproved PRs continue to
use hosted routing.
- Permit approved manual routing canaries on protected master.
- Use a validated roster snapshot for placement. Invalid JSON, missing
settings, stale snapshots, and unapproved identities select hosted
routing without a placement-time JSON parse.
- Preserve the full in-job identity, rerun actor, repository, head,
merge, and stack checks.
- Update stack-scope and placement regression tests and document the
pool and rollback.
## Verification
- The routing scripts and placement expression tests passed (44 tests),
routing-plus-shard tests passed (56 tests), and the existing
.github/scripts suite passed (381 tests).
- Existing routing allow/deny scenarios passed with the extracted script
(16 cases).
- actionlint passed with the dedicated custom runner label declared in
its local configuration.
- git diff --check passed.
- Full pnpm typecheck/test/build cannot run in this worktree because
dependencies are not installed. The change is limited to workflow YAML
and Node tests.
- The dedicated pool is deployed with two warm On-Demand workers and a
four-worker ceiling. The routing qualification passed: it started about
five seconds after workflow creation, selected AWS, and finished while
the hosted gate in the same PR remained queued.
- Bootstrap https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16039 is
merged. The deployed group now authorizes only ci-routing.yml on
protected master, and its master canary passed.
## Risks
- The maintainer explicitly approved a queued-CI admin bypass after
current-head Greptile 5/5 and focused verification.
- Activation requires the deployed routing Fleet and its group to
authorize the routing workflow on protected master. Keep the bootstrap
dependency explicit.
- The group must authorize only ci-routing.yml on protected master and
canonical repository ID 1170821064.
- The routing workflow runs no checkout or PR code and has read-only
permissions. The test admission checks are unchanged.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and file editing.
The exact runtime 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
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused routing and
workflow tests; full pnpm commands are blocked by missing worktree
dependencies)
- [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] Required CI status checked; the maintainer explicitly approved
admin bypass for queued CI after clean current-head review and focused
verification
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 on
canary/v2026.1012.1-canary.1
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3867107687 |
fix(workspaces): verify Git storage and retain source owners
Use verified checkout and shared Git metadata identities instead of inferring ownership from the metadata parent. Retain authorized storage ownership after checkout removal, fence existing readers, and avoid unrelated Git probes for conventional layouts. Anchor worktree creation to the verified source repository. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
2b8da4ab64 |
docs(release): canonicalize v2026.1012.0 release notes (#16045)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release process keeps one curated notes file for each release in `releases/` > - Beta notes live in `releases/beta/` until the beta becomes a stable release > - v2026.1012.0 was published from beta 2026.1006.0-beta.0 on 2026-10-12 and its notes file still has the beta path on master > - The release workflow did not push its usual canonicalize branch because the notes came from the source tree of the release candidate > - This pull request renames the beta notes file to the stable path > - The benefit is that the stable notes link `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` resolves on master and the beta path does not stay as a duplicate ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the problem** The stable release v2026.1012.0 is published. The GitHub Release body is the notes file that PR #16000 merged. On master, that file is still at `releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md`. The stable path `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` does not exist on master. Links to the stable path return 404. **Expected behavior** The notes for v2026.1012.0 are at `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` on master. The beta path is removed. The content is identical to the GitHub Release body. **Additional context** Related: #16000 (pre-publish notes fix) and #15388 (curated beta notes). ## What Changed - Rename `releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md` to `releases/v2026.1012.0.md`. - This is a pure rename. The file content does not change. Git reports `R100`. ## Verification - Run `git diff -M --name-status master...release-notes/v2026.1012.0-canonicalize`. The output is one line: `R100 releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md releases/v2026.1012.0.md`. - Compare the file with the GitHub Release body at https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/releases/tag/v2026.1012.0. The content is the same. The git blob is `e7503b64aa5bcb74b2da6bb05a7da2554919e0ec` on both master and this branch. - The git tag `v2026.1012.0` points at the release candidate commit `bba6a45f0d364cfd962ac59b3bdf2426a8222adb`. That commit already has the same file at `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` with the same blob. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a documentation rename with no content change. No code or config changes. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code with tool use and extended reasoning. The rename was done with `git mv`. No AI-generated content is in the file. ## 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 🤖 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>canary/v2026.1012.1-canary.0 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8e7b5db822 |
ci: add protected routing workflow for reserved AWS capacity (#16039)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip uses CI to verify changes before release. > - Trusted PR tests can run on isolated AWS workers. > - Their runner-selection job currently waits for GitHub-hosted capacity. > - A large hosted test queue therefore blocks admission to AWS. > - A dedicated routing workflow lets us reserve capacity for metadata validation. > - This PR adds that workflow without changing the active PR caller. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** CI reliability enhancement. **Where is the issue?** The Select trusted runner job in PR CI. **What's wrong?** The routing job competes with a large hosted test queue. Its sampled median wait was about 20 minutes. AWS tests cannot begin before this job finishes. **Suggested fix** Add a protected reusable routing workflow. Deploy its dedicated AWS pool, then switch the PR caller in a follow-up PR. No overlapping open PR or issue was found. ## What Changed - Add ci-routing.yml with the existing author, sender, rerun actor, repository, head, merge, and stack checks. - Target the dedicated paperclip-ci-routing-x64 Fleet. - Export runner and full_ci decisions to reusable workflow callers. - Add tests for metadata-only execution, reserved placement, and output forwarding. - Keep the active PR caller unchanged until the pool is deployed. ## Verification - The routing tests passed (30 tests), including 20 executed runner-selection cases and 8 executed stack-scope cases. - Existing routing allow/deny scenarios also passed with the extracted script (16 cases). - A live qualification job selected AWS and passed on the reserved routing pool in https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38308312153/job/115007621128 while the hosted gate remained queued. - actionlint passed with the dedicated custom runner label declared in its local configuration. - git diff --check passed. - Full pnpm typecheck/test/build cannot run in this worktree because dependencies are not installed. The change is limited to workflow YAML and Node tests. - After merge, configure the restricted runner group, deploy the pool, and dispatch ci-routing.yml on master. The unused workflow does not affect current PR placement. ## Risks - The maintainer explicitly approved merging this rollout after current-head Greptile 5/5 and focused verification, while the hosted CI checks remain queued. - The dedicated Fleet must exist before the workflow can receive a runner. This PR introduces the workflow without switching active PR CI. - The group must authorize only ci-routing.yml on protected master and canonical repository ID 1170821064. - The routing workflow runs no checkout or PR code and has read-only permissions. The test admission checks are unchanged. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and file editing. The exact runtime 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 - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused routing and workflow tests; full pnpm commands are blocked by missing worktree dependencies) - [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] Required CI was checked; the maintainer explicitly approved an admin bypass for queued checks after clean review - [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
|
3572d872f7 |
fix(runtime): batch validated workspace deletions
Validate every path in each bounded batch before invoking one removal command. Preserve filename boundaries and parent confinement while avoiding a separate process for each deleted file. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b742aff3e1 |
Merge origin/master and reconcile Slack and workspace migrations
Preserve managed Slack setup and typed task defaults. Regenerate task workspace migrations after the upstream Slack migration and synchronize the paired feature/access maps. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e364b92c82 |
docs: add PR rules for file size and code comments (#16036)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use CONTRIBUTING.md to prepare pull requests. > - The guide is missing two code submission rules. > - Contributors need to see these rules before they submit changes. > - This pull request adds the file size and code comment rules to the requirements for all PRs. > - The benefit is a clear statement of the requested contribution policy. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing documentation. **Where is the issue?** CONTRIBUTING.md, PR Requirements (all PRs). **What's wrong?** The guide does not state the requested limits on file growth and code comments. **Suggested fix** Add both rules with the wording requested by the maintainer. No related issue or PR was found in the GitHub search. ## What Changed - Add: "Do not submit a PR that moves a code file from less than 1,000 lines of code to more than 1,000 lines of code." - Add: "Do not submit a PR that includes code comments." ## Verification - Confirm both rules appear under PR Requirements (all PRs) in CONTRIBUTING.md. - `git diff --check origin/master...HEAD` passed. - Greptile passed on commit `8cc5cd4be63cfbb16b3265b39e487581387bc3d0` with 5/5 and no actionable findings. - Local `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm test:run`, and `pnpm build` were attempted. This worktree has no installed dependencies, so typecheck cannot resolve Node types and tests/build cannot load tsx. GitHub CI results will be checked before merge. ## Risks - Low risk. This change adds documentation only. - The wording states contribution policy without adding an automated gate. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 via Codex. Used reasoning, shell tools, and file editing. The exact runtime 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 - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (not applicable to this documentation-only change; the full commands were attempted but blocked by missing local dependencies) - [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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
f0e12c8519 |
Add managed Slack setup with an independent own-app path (#15679)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Slack connects a person to an agent through an installed app and a verified identity. > - Independent installations must remain usable without Paperclip Cloud or manager credentials. > - Approved Cloud deployments can use Slack manager grants to create and install each agent's app. > - Both paths should share credential storage, identity checks, recovery, and the existing runtime. > - This pull request adds gated managed setup and keeps independent app setup under Advanced. > - It also makes ongoing connection settings and personal test messages easier to use. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Slack setup, connection settings, tenant credential storage, and the Cloud connector handoff. **Problem or motivation** Approved deployments need an installation flow without pasted configuration tokens. Open-source users must retain their independent Slack app flow. A connection manager also needs a simple way to check a bot from Settings. **Proposed solution** Use the managed path when the instance is configured to support it. Choose agent and Connect are the two visible stops. Continue starts authorization or installation. Use your own app remains under Advanced before creation. Save personal manager grants by company, Paperclip user, Slack user, workspace, and manager app. Reuse only verified identities for test messages. Unknown identities must complete a private Slack connection challenge before linking and receiving the test DM. **Alternatives considered** A shared bot would change each agent's Slack identity. Requiring Slack CLI or a hosted service for self-hosted users would remove independent installation. **Roadmap alignment** This maintainer-requested change improves Connected Apps and experimental Agent Chat. It adds provisioning and management controls to the existing Slack runtime. **Additional context** The companion Cloud broker profile is a separate deployment prerequisite. Managed setup remains gated. Existing-app adoption is deferred. ## What Changed - Extract Slack registration, provider requests, completion, customer-owned setup, managed setup, and personal manager grants into focused services. Preserve the compatibility facade and independent removal cleanup. - Add company-scoped manager grants and a registration reference through an additive, idempotent migration after current master. Keep runtime credentials separate from app-registration secrets. - Add authenticated manager authorization, sealed handoff, serialized refresh and revocation, app creation, managed installation, and installer-bound OAuth fallback. - Preserve creation intent, block automatic uncertain recreation, save credentials before downstream checks, and validate app, workspace, bot, scopes, and installer identity. - Add the two-stop production wizard and ordered stories. Keep the own-app, manual, existing-app, and legacy-draft paths. - Simplify Settings. Open Slack configuration targets the saved app. The test-message action has its own row. Remove the old manual-avatar section, channel-message section, and broken permissions link. - Add paginated account discovery and a private connection challenge for unknown accounts. Expired invitations stop waiting and offer a new private invitation. Save send receipts before provider dispatch and preserve confirmed delivery when activity logging fails. - Reinstall the saved managed app on explicit reconnect, replace revoked credentials, and resume completion. Persist reconnect intent and duplicate-request receipts without creating another app. - Update provider browser tests, recovery tests, secret redaction, setup documentation, and the agent prompt. Preserve current master's durable verification scheduling. ## Verification - Full workspace typecheck and repository build passed on `56d389d47a`. The subsequent reconnect retry fix in `288364eada` also passed UI typecheck and UI build. - 114 focused Slack registration cases and 13 production managed-wizard cases passed, including fresh-token reconnect, retry after installation failure, and duplicate reconnect requests. - All nine affected Slack browser cases passed against the production UI and a disposable fixture server. They cover managed setup, automatic setup, own-app selection, refresh, recovery, mobile behavior, and connection settings. - Eight focused real-database test-message cases passed. They cover a private ownership challenge, saved grant reuse, account pagination, revoked and conflicting links, workspace mismatch, disabled DMs, revoked membership, audit failure, ambiguous dispatch, and secret canaries. - UI token gates and the production Storybook build passed. - Greptile reviewed exact head `288364eada5d9c114fad991ff634612639d06672` at 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved review threads. - The full repository test suite and current-head CI are running. Their final results will replace this line before merge. - Earlier live feature previews created two bots in the authorized Paperclip Slack workspace and reused one personal manager grant. Local managed Continue created and installed a bot without a configuration token or a separate Add to Slack action. Avatars, welcome DMs, signed callbacks, and direct replies were observed. A Settings test DM also arrived in the signed-in user's Slack account. - Earlier staging thread qualification required manual publication recovery for one bot. Current-head live qualification remains required before enabling the production default. Fixture results do not establish Slack approval behavior in other workspaces. ## Risks - Personal manager tokens can create apps. They stay in scoped vault entries. The manager client secret stays at the broker. Company, actor/session, origin, and app identity checks apply throughout setup. - The additive migration must also work on qualification instances that applied earlier branch migrations. Table, column, index, and constraint creation is idempotent. - Creation and message timeouts can leave uncertain outcomes. Saved request IDs prevent automatic duplicate dispatch. - Unknown Slack identities must receive and complete their private challenge while signed in. Account selection alone does not grant Paperclip permissions. Existing revoked or conflicting links are not overwritten. - A development-only manager transport uses an explicitly configured private credential file for local qualification. Production ignores this transport; no manager credentials are bundled with open source. - Managed rollout requires Slack approval, the companion broker deployment, configured secrets, and final live qualification. Removing a connection does not delete its Slack app. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID 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 - [ ] 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>canary/v2026.1012.0-canary.13 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a2d6555d81 |
fix(workspaces): preserve remote fallback and release denied reopens
Authorize the local directory or transport that Git will actually read. Keep remote sibling fallback when its configured directory is missing, while preserving inherited destination permissions on checkout reuse. Clear only this reopen's pending generation after post-provision source revocation so a denied, dirty worktree can still be archived safely. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
7d9b93aee2 |
docs: establish paired feature and agent access maps (#16025)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use the feature map to understand and verify product capabilities. > - Agents need APIs and usable entry points within their permission boundaries. > - Product recipes and agent access need separate records with shared capability IDs. > - This pull request establishes that contract and gives maintenance ownership of both maps. > - The benefit is repeatable access review without changing product behavior or permissions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15983, which added the portable verification skills and updated the feature map. This is its contract-only follow-up. Related: #15288 added the original feature map. **Issue type** Missing documentation and maintenance contract. **Where is the issue?** The product map, its missing agent access companions, and the verification skills. **What's wrong?** There is no shared convention for API presence, agent entry points, permission boundaries, access gaps, or evidence. An API declaration does not prove that a permitted native or remote agent can use it. **Suggested fix** Keep the product and agent access maps as siblings under `maps/`. Reuse capability IDs. Record representative source inventory separately from operation review and live proof. Keep both maps aligned through the maintenance skill. ## What Changed - Move the existing product map to `maps/feature-map/`. Preserve its recipes and Poteto format. Update relative links and add companion links. - Add `maps/agent-access-map/` with 35 area files and 171 matching capability IDs. Seed representative API operations, agent paths, policies and known gaps from the reviewed source inventory. Mark entries as `baseline`, `source-only`, and live verification `not-run`. - Define the shared contract in `maps/README.md`. Track API presence, agent availability, policy, evidence and review depth separately. Require operation enumeration before marking a broad capability operation-reviewed. - Extend `maintain-verification-skill` to reconcile both maps and inspect actual route policy and production tool admission. Update creation, verification, notices and contributor references to use the shared contract. - Add `scripts/check-maps.mjs` and ten regression tests. Check matching areas/IDs, indexes, references, contract fields, API method/path examples, justified exceptions and evidence-state consistency. - Keep the coverage inventory unchanged. Preserve skill invocation policies and both MIT license blocks. No product API, permission, UI, runtime helper, migration, dependency or workflow changes. ## Verification - Passed: `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` reports 35 paired areas and 171 matching capability IDs. All local map references resolve. - Passed: `node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs` runs ten tests. Fixtures cover missing companions, renamed/orphan/duplicate IDs, broken references, missing operation fields, empty exceptions, missing API examples, empty policy fields, and verified evidence without passed verification. - Passed: metadata validation for all three verification skills. Skill and contributor links resolve. Invocation policies and both license blocks are unchanged. - Compared relocated recipes with current master. Contents differ only in relative links and companion links. `coverage.json` is byte-for-byte unchanged. Master's updated read-only interaction test reference is retained. - Passed: `git diff --check`. The branch starts from current master and contains only this contract change. - Repository-wide typecheck, tests and build were not run locally for this documentation and Node structural-check scope. Live agent access was not exercised. Those gaps are explicit in the baseline entries; the structural check does not certify behavior. CI and automated review are pending. ## Risks - The companions are representative source baselines. They are not complete operation inventories or passed agent journeys. - The checker cannot establish actual permissions, native tool admission, operation completeness or truthful live evidence. Maintenance must inspect source and verify with the actual permitted agent context. - External links to the old product-map directory may need updates. Repository references have been updated. - Existing access gaps and board/user restrictions remain recorded. This contract does not change authority or implement missing paths. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size, or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, file edits, shell commands, and structural regression tests. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
089d2048ae |
fix(workspaces): retain local copy privacy and restore worktree proofs
Verify registered worktrees during preparation so upgrades and interrupted admissions can resume without granting writes to ordinary occupied folders. Authorize every configured local copy and preserve source permissions on staging and task roots, including URI-only sources and closed-worktree reopen. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
4b766b8729 |
fix(acpx): record turn activity at the moment a stop fires (#15962)
Record stop-time ACP turn diagnostics (last-event age, oldest pending tool age, pending tool kinds) so wall-clock timeout events show whether the turn was stalled. Diagnostics only. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <Paperclip-Paperclip@users.noreply.github.com> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1012.0-canary.12 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
0d0e138dad |
refactor(chat): extract channel status, receipts, drafts and authority workflows (#15995)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Chat channels connect that work to provider conversations. > - Provider workflows still fill the shared service. > - Their authority and recovery rules need clear homes. > - This PR lands five reviewed extractions into channel folders. > - Shared authorization, state and worker lifetime stay explicit. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15976, #15996, #15999, #16001 and #16002. This root PR now contains all five extractions from batch three. The four upper PRs were merged into their parents. The combined tree matches reviewed stack head `789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exactly. ## What Changed - Extract Slack session status and accepted-file receipt recovery. - Extract Telegram publication drafts and Stop handling. - Extract Photon events and native responses. - Extract Teams file-transfer authority. - Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 29,897 to 26,461 lines (3,436 lines, 11.5%). - Preserve function bodies, runtime-map identity, leases and transaction boundaries. ## Verification - All 117 selected public-service cases passed before and after their respective extractions. - All 30 moved declarations and remaining service statements preserve normalized syntax across the five slices. - Server typecheck, module boundaries and whitespace checks passed. - Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. Combined-head CI and review are pending on `5de1b0b99d71049a72440e8c131bf4bb30bdf3f3`. - Fixtures exercise assembled services and disposable databases, not live third-party providers. - Cumulative local `pnpm test:run` on `789e918b5af49ec1958076ce4d22d31006205302` exited 1: 32,414 passed, 125 skipped, one failure. `company-skills-routes.test.ts:1691` (`stars, forks, and comments on skills through company-scoped endpoints`) failed with `socket hang up`; that test and its route are unchanged by this stack. The same 58-case suite then passed in isolation without code changes. The original command did not reach 111 later serialized suites; its failure is retained, so the full-local-test checklist remains unchecked. ```sh pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'Slack session|Slack turns to Idle|signed Slack session stop|denies guest Slack stops' ``` - Combined-head CI attempt 1: five runners received a shutdown signal at 19:13:08 UTC (server shard 10/12, serialized shards 2/9 and 7/9, E2E shards 3/8 and 7/8). These jobs stopped during execution without a failing test assertion. [Original workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38293566028). The affected jobs will receive one unchanged retry after the other jobs finish. ## Risks - Changes cross durable provider recovery and authority boundaries. The moved bodies preserve syntax, and 117 focused public-service cases passed before and after their extractions. - Shared workers, timers, runtime maps and generic authorization remain in the service. - The full local test run failed in an unchanged company-skills route test; its result and the unrun suites are recorded above. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. No separate agent was used. ## 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 - [ ] 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4c220a0c04 |
Handle macOS nonempty errors in readonly test-home cleanup
Retry bounded directory permission repair for ENOTEMPTY alongside EACCES and EPERM. Preserve symlink confinement and final failure propagation. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
650198cc04 |
Merge origin/master into task workspace ownership
Preserve owned-home cleanup safety while integrating upstream runtime-context cleanup, current Runner build caching, release crate caching and verification docs. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
20efaf904f |
Require verified worktrees before relaxing source write authority
Keep copy intent deny-only, verify registered linked worktrees after Git and before provisioning, and preserve write restrictions on occupied original source folders. Retained privacy remains effective through failed preparation and revoked access. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
cc88b61c09 |
feat: add portable verification skills and refresh the feature map (#15983)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors use the feature map to select verification recipes. > - The repository needs separate skills to create a verifier, maintain recipes, and run checks. > - Shared recipes must match current routes, controls, and prerequisites. > - This pull request adds portable verification skills and updates the existing map. > - The benefit is a repeatable verification workflow with clear ownership and evidence limits. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #15288, which added the existing feature map. The related test cleanup in #15978 changes test ownership; this PR changes skill instructions and recipes. **Issue type** Missing documentation and outdated verification instructions. **Where is the issue?** The project-local skills in `.agents/skills/` and the recipes in `feature-map/`. **What's wrong?** The repository lacks the portable creation and maintenance skills. The verifier mixes live verification with map editing. Some recipes describe old controls or omit required flags, identities, and provider setup. **Suggested fix** Import the skills and their complete references from Paperclip's pstack fork. Keep the existing map in its current directory. Let the verifier read recipes and report drift. Let the maintenance skill update the map. ## What Changed - Add `create-verification-skill` and `maintain-verification-skill` from the portable fork of Poteto's pstack. Include invocation policies, all feature-map examples, self-contained attribution notices and the full MIT license in each skill folder. - Use the existing `feature-map/` directory and Poteto's recipe format. Omit the fork's separate runtime skill and runtime-skill dependencies because Paperclip supplies execution. - Add `verify-paperclip` with executable launch, readiness, onboarding, and cleanup helpers. Use isolated temporary data and separate evidence directories. - Make `verify-paperclip` consume the map and report recipe drift. Give map editing to `maintain-verification-skill`. - Review all 35 feature files and correct 30 recipes. Clarify routes, flags, current controls, persistence scope, and the limits of linked tests. - Remove the unrelated Conference Room flag change from the onboarding smoke helper. - Add a standard-library ownership test. It proves that doctor and stop reject a foreign checkout without stopping its live server. A delayed-exit fixture also proves cleanup waits for runtime exit. - Keep audit screenshots and scratch reports outside the repository. No product code, migrations, lockfile, or workflow changes. ## Verification - Passed after rebase: metadata validation for all three skills, Python syntax and executable checks, JavaScript syntax, 35-entry map/index consistency, relative links, license preservation, and `git diff --check`. - Ran one isolated live audit before rebase. Checked task persistence, document upload/download bytes, goal hierarchy, project edits, search, local process Agent Chat, question replies, queued-message discard/stop, and a harmless loopback MCP call. - Checked local settings and draft flows. Synthetic cost events reached a small budget limit and paused the test agent. These checks do not prove external model quality or provider billing. - Checked cleanup of the audit server, database, local MCP fixture, and workspace service inventory. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck`. - Greptile: 5/5 on commit `4344ac4df7`. The cleanup finding is fixed and its review thread is resolved. A fresh review is pending for the notice relocation. - Passed: `python3 -m unittest discover -s .agents/skills/verify-paperclip/tests -v`. Both tests pass: the foreign fixture stayed alive after rejection, and owned cleanup waited for delayed runtime exit. - Passed: `pnpm build`. - All GitHub CI checks were green on commit `4344ac4df7`. The cloud-auth browser shard passed after one retry for a disposed mocked API response. The notice relocation passed skill metadata, relative-link, and license-preservation checks; fresh CI/review is pending. - The full local `pnpm test:run` did not complete. It was interrupted after nearly 30 minutes once the complete CI suite passed on the same commit. Exit code: 130. The new helper safety tests passed locally. The local full-suite checklist item stays unchecked. - Full live coverage is incomplete. Authenticated multi-user checks and external provider journeys need their own identities, credentials, and targets. - The corrected onboarding helper could not be re-tested after removing the flag mutation. Two fresh launches failed before server startup. Direct PostgreSQL initialization reported exhausted shared-memory IDs or limits. The host had free disk space. No host-wide limits or unrelated instances were changed. ## Risks - Recipe drift can return as the UI changes. The map records verification scope, not proof of a passed journey. - The new helpers assume a source checkout with installed dependencies, Python, Node, and `lsof`. The onboarding helper also needs Playwright. - The local audit found observations that need separate investigation: an action test returned fixture data while the connection control showed Off and native profiles existed; a failed status-card setup task left the card showing Setting up. Workspace service start also did not reach a running state. This PR does not change product behavior or redefine those outcomes as success. - The main audit trace did not finalize during browser shutdown. Screenshots, text captures, and iteration results were retained. - Live evidence was captured before rebase. The onboarding helper re-test and full provider/auth qualification remain incomplete. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted with this change. The session does not expose the exact serving model ID, configured context-window size, or reasoning setting. Capabilities used: source analysis, read-only source subagents, file edits, shell commands, and browser automation. ## 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 - [ ] 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>canary/v2026.1012.0-canary.11 |
||
|
|
8227485372 |
perf(ci): cache the Runner's release crate artifacts keyed by their inputs (#15932)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its trusted PR workflow builds the Runner's Rust binary in five
jobs: Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, Canary Dry Run, and the
`rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of Verify Paperclip Runner. The `Build`
job is the slowest check in almost every green run (461s, 489s and 515s
in runs 38180574768, 38182717052 and 38183149920 on 2026-10-11).
> - Each of those jobs restores master's `release-runner-v2` dependency
cache. That cache holds only third-party crates. `rust-cache` removes
workspace crates when it saves, and a fresh checkout invalidates cargo's
mtime fingerprints for workspace crates in any case. So cargo compiles
`paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch on every run. The
job logs show one `Compiling` line and 28s to 49s for it.
> - 18 of the 239 commits on `master` in the seven days before this
change touched the crate's inputs. The other 221 compiled the same
sources to the same binary again.
> - This pull request adds a second cache that holds only that crate's
release artifacts (about 70 MB). The key is made from the compiler, the
checkout root and a hash of every input the build reads. The master Rust
lane writes it. A pull request whose merge tree has byte-identical
inputs restores it and marks the artifacts newer than the checkout, so
cargo keeps them. Every other pull request misses and compiles as
before.
> - The benefit is about 28s to 49s less on `Build`, which is the run's
critical path, and the same on Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Runner
lanes, for about nine of ten pull requests.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the
enhancement template.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
The time the trusted PR workflow spends to compile the Runner's own
crate on every run.
**Subsystem affected**
CI / build
**Current behavior**
Every PR job that builds the Runner binary compiles
`paperclip-runner-core` in release mode from scratch. The compile takes
28s to 49s on the `runs-on` fleet (one `Compiling paperclip-runner-core`
line, then `Finished release profile` in runs 38169436532 to 38183149920
on 2026-10-11). The shared Rust cache cannot help: it holds only
third-party crates, and a fresh checkout gives every source a new mtime,
which makes cargo discard the crate's fingerprints.
**Proposed behavior**
The master Rust lane in `release-verify.yml` saves the crate's release
artifacts under a key made from the compiler, the checkout root and a
hash of every input the release build reads. The PR jobs that build the
binary restore that entry read-only. On a hit, a script sets the mtime
of every restored artifact to now, so cargo sees every source as older
than the build and keeps the artifacts. `pnpm build` then prints
`Finished release profile` in under a second for that crate. On a miss,
cargo compiles the crate exactly as before.
**Reason and benefit**
About 28s to 49s off `Build`, the slowest check in almost every green
run, and the same off the Typecheck, Canary Dry Run and two Verify
Paperclip Runner lanes. The saving applies to every pull request whose
merge tree does not change the crate's inputs, which was 221 of 239
`master` commits in the week before this change.
**Breaking changes**
None. The checks are unchanged. A miss or an eviction costs the compile
time it costs today and nothing else.
**Additional context**
This is a workflow change. `pr.yml` calls `pr-trusted.yml@master`, so
this pull request's own run uses the current reader steps, and the
writer runs only on a master push. The saving becomes visible on the
first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push has written
the entry.
## What Changed
- `scripts/runner-release-crate-cache.mjs` (new): the one place that
defines the cached path list (`CACHED_PATHS`), the hashed inputs
(`HASHED_INPUTS`) and the files a restore must contain (`REQUIRED`). The
`scope` subcommand prints the platform, the `rustc --version --verbose`
release, commit and host, and a hash of the checkout root. The
`mark-current` subcommand sets the mtime of every restored artifact to
now and prints a `paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` JSON line with the
file count and bytes. If the restored set lacks any of the seven files
cargo's freshness check reads or checks for (the fingerprint hash and
dep-info of each unit, the lib's rlib and rmeta, the binary under
`deps`), it removes the restored files, prints `action: discarded`
naming the missing file, and exits 0, so cargo compiles as on a miss.
- `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: after the `release-runner-v2`
restore in `typecheck_release_registry`, `build` and `canary_dry_run`,
and in the `rust` and `vitest 2/2` lanes of `verify_paperclip_runner`
(new matrix key `release_crate: true`), three steps: compute the key
scope, `actions/cache/restore` the crate under
`runner-release-crate-v1-<scope>-<hashFiles(...)>` with no
`restore-keys`, and run `mark-current` when `cache-hit == 'true'`. The
`hashFiles` list covers the toolchain pin, the manifests and lockfile,
the crate sources, the protocol tree and the three fixture trees the
test modules include (two under the Runner package and
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` at the repository root).
- `.github/workflows/release-verify.yml`: in the Rust lane of an
own-repository master push, after the debug warm-up: compute the key
scope, look the key up (`lookup-only: true`), and on a miss run `cargo
clean --release -p paperclip-runner-core` and `pnpm build:binary` (the
exact command the readers run, so the entry carries no test-profile
variants), then `actions/cache/save` the same path list under the same
key.
- `scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs` (new, 10
tests, in `test:release-registry`): the path list and hashed inputs are
the expected ones and exist; every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!`
in the crate sources resolves under a hashed input, whether its argument
is a literal or a `concat!` of literals, `env!("CARGO_MANIFEST_DIR")`
and macro metavariables, and any other form fails the test by name (this
guard found the `test/fixtures` tree during development and the
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures` tree in review); the parser itself is tested
on a synthetic crate for each supported form and six rejected ones;
every PR reader restores after the dependency cache and marks before its
build command with the script's exact path list and key and no
`restore-keys`; the Verify lanes are gated by `release_crate`; the
writer runs after the checks with the lookup, the clean and build, and
the save under the readers' exact path list and key; the scope changes
with the compiler and the checkout root and survives a missing `rustc`;
`mark-current` makes every artifact newer than the checkout, leaves a
dependency's artifacts alone, discards a restore missing any one of the
seven required files (one case each, checking the named reason), and
still marks a restore missing any one of the seven files cargo does not
need.
## Review fixes
Greptile's two findings on the first commit were both valid and are
fixed in the second commit:
- **Incomplete caches looked usable.** `REQUIRED` checked four files,
but cargo's freshness check needs seven. Measured with cargo 1.97.1 on
the real crate (restore, touch the artifacts, delete one file, build):
without the lib's fingerprint hash, dep-info, rlib or rmeta it
recompiles the crate (24s to 27s); without the bin's fingerprint hash,
dep-info or the binary under `deps` it relinks (1.5s); without either
`.json` fingerprint record, either rustc `.d` file, the uplifted binary
or its `.d` it reports the crate fresh in 0.15s and recreates the
uplifted binary from `deps`, and the staging step then copies it.
`REQUIRED` now lists exactly the seven files, the glob for the binary
under `deps` excludes the `.d` beside it, and the test removes each of
the seven in turn (discarded, naming it) and each of the other seven in
turn (still marked).
- **Composed include paths escaped the guard.** The regex matched only
`include_str!("literal")` and skipped `include_str!(concat!(...))`,
which the crate uses four times (30 of 34 includes were checked). The
guard now parses every include argument and resolves the `concat!`
forms; one of them, in `provider_events.rs`, reads
`tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/native-completion/terminal-tool-carrier.json`
at the repository root, outside every hashed input. It is test-only, so
today's release binary does not read it, but the key is meant to cover
every include whatever its build, so `tests/runner-e2e/fixtures/**` (9
files, 80 KB) joins `HASHED_INPUTS` and the six key embeddings in the
two workflows. With the first commit's input list, the new guard fails
on exactly that include.
- `doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md`: a "Runner release crate cache"
section under the Runner verification dependency cache, with the key,
the writer, the readers and the trust boundary.
- `package.json`: the new test file in `test:release-registry`.
## Verification
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/runner-release-crate-cache.test.mjs`:
10 tests pass, three consecutive runs.
- The second commit, with the real toolchain on the real crate (`rustc
1.97.1`, cold build 2m20s, the crate's artifacts 74 MB): every source
touched to a fresh-checkout mtime and the archived artifacts restored,
cargo compiles (`Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.8s and 25.1s, the
two controls); restored and marked by `mark-current`, `Finished release
profile in 0.16s` with no `Compiling`, and the same on a second build.
Then, for each of the fourteen files cargo wrote for the two units, one
at a time: restored, marked and that file deleted, cargo recompiles
without any of the seven `REQUIRED` files and reports fresh without any
of the other seven; restored with that file deleted and run through
`mark-current`, the seven required ones print `action: discarded` naming
the file and the others print `marked`. A restore holding only the seven
required files builds fresh in 0.15s, cargo recreates the uplifted
binary, and `stage-runner-binary.mjs` copies it into `dist/bin`.
- `node --test '.github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs'`: 378 of 381 pass. The
3 failures are in `docker-canary-promotion.test.mjs` and fail the same
way on an unmodified `master` checkout in this sandbox (the stand-in
docker writes no `calls.jsonl`).
- `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/e2e-shard.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 99 of 101 pass; the
2 failures spawn `pnpm`, which is not on this sandbox's PATH, and fail
the same way on `master`.
- Both workflows parse as YAML. No job has a duplicate step name or step
id.
- The mechanism, with the real toolchain (`rustc 1.97.1`, the package's
pin) on a copy of the crate: a cold `cargo build --release -p
paperclip-runner-core --bin paperclip-runnerd` (2m23s here). Then the
artifact set was archived with `tar`, removed, every source re-copied so
each had a new mtime, and the set restored:
- restored, not marked: `Compiling paperclip-runner-core`, 24.6s (the
control; this is what CI does today);
- restored and marked by `mark-current`: `Finished release profile in
0.15s`, no `Compiling`; a second build is the same;
- one Rust source edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 24.0s;
- one protocol schema edited after a marked restore: `Compiling`, 23.9s
(the protocol files enter cargo's dep-info as absolute paths and are
hashed into the key);
- the rlib removed from a restored set: `mark-current` prints `action:
discarded, reason: incomplete: the lib rlib is missing` and removes the
rest, and cargo compiles.
- Not run here: the workflow steps themselves. `pr.yml` pins
`pr-trusted.yml@master`, so this pull request's own `Build` job runs the
current reader steps, and the writer runs only on a master push. The
first PR runs after the merge and after the next master push show the
`Restore the Runner release crate` step's result and the
`paperclip.runner-release-crate.v1` line in their `Build` logs.
## Risks
- Correctness: a reader can only restore artifacts that master built
from inputs byte-identical to its own merge tree, because every input
the build reads is in the key, and the key has no prefix match. A pull
request cannot write. The trust boundary is unchanged: master writes, a
pull request restores master's entry.
- An input the build reads that is outside the hashed patterns would let
a stale artifact pass. The release dep-info lists the crate sources and
the protocol schemas and fixtures; all are hashed. The guard test
resolves every `include_str!` and `include_bytes!` in the crate, literal
or `concat!`, and fails if one lands outside the hashed inputs or uses a
form it cannot resolve, so a new include form cannot slip past it by not
matching a regex.
- GitHub-hosted runners check out under `/home/runner/work`, the
`runs-on` fleets under `/home/runner/_work`. Cargo records the included
protocol files as absolute paths, so an entry from one root is useless
under the other. The checkout root is in the key, so the other root
misses instead of restoring something cargo then discards.
- A cache that does not keep mtimes on restore changes nothing: the
artifacts are then already newer than the checkout, and `mark-current`
sets them to now in any case.
- Cost: one new entry of about 70 MB per distinct input set, written
only by the master Rust lane on a miss, plus one `cargo clean` and
`build:binary` (about 40s to 50s) on that lane when the inputs changed.
The readers pay one restore of about 70 MB (two to three seconds at the
fleet's observed restore speed) and a sub-second `mark-current`.
- An incomplete entry (a writer that saved a partial set) is discarded
by `mark-current` and costs one compile, the same as a miss.
## Model Used
- Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1),
extended thinking, with tool use (shell, file editing, GitHub CLI, a
local Rust toolchain for the experiment) in a Paperclip agent 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
🤖 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>
|
||
|
|
7df517d18f |
perf(build): reuse a current Runner build in the server's prepare:runner-vendor step (#15926)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Its CI runs a `Build` job on every pull request. That job runs `pnpm build` and then verifies the public npm install. Since the server test shards got faster, `Build` is the slowest check in most runs (419-497s on the six fully green `master` runs created 2026-10-11 19:46Z to 20:17Z). > - Inside `pnpm build`, the server package is the last package to build. Its first step, `prepare:runner-vendor`, runs the full build of `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` so the server can vendor `packages/paperclip-runner/dist`. In `pnpm -r build` that package was built seconds earlier by the same command. The second build took 12-16s on those six runs and sits on the critical path of the job. > - The step cannot just be removed. A standalone `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build` (the Dockerfile's path) must produce a current vendored Runner on its own. > - This pull request keeps that guarantee and skips only the build that is provably redundant. The Runner's `build` records a digest of its inputs, captured before its first step and confirmed after its last, together with a manifest of every file it left under `dist`. The server's `prepare:runner-vendor` reuses the build when the digest matches, the stamp is for this platform, and every recorded output is still there at its recorded size. Any other state runs the same full Runner build as before. > - The benefit is 12-16s off the `Build` job and off every other `pnpm build` (the Canary Dry Run's `release.sh` build, local builds), with no change to what a standalone server build produces. The PR's own first run measured it: the server step reused the build in 56ms where `master` runs rebuilt for 11-15s. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the enhancement template. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The server build's `prepare:runner-vendor` step, which builds `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` so the server can vendor its `dist`. **Subsystem affected** Build and CI (`server/package.json`, `packages/paperclip-runner/package.json`, the `Build` job). **Current behavior** `prepare:runner-vendor` runs the Runner's full `build` every time. Inside `pnpm -r build`, the Runner was already built by the same command 20 to 25 seconds earlier, with every check passing. On six fully green `master` runs (2026-10-11, 19:46Z to 20:17Z) the repeated build took 11.8s to 15.9s, measured from the `server build$ pnpm run prepare:runner-vendor` log line to the Runner's `Finished release profile` line. The server package builds last, so that time is on the critical path of `Build`, which is the slowest check in most pull request runs. **Proposed behavior** - The Runner's `build` starts with `node scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs --begin` and ends with `node scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs --finish`. `--begin` removes the previous stamp and records a digest of every build input before the first step reads anything. `--finish`, after every step and check has passed, recomputes the digest and writes `packages/paperclip-runner/node_modules/.cache/paperclip-runner-build-inputs.json` only if the inputs are still the ones the build began with, together with the path and size of every file under `dist`. A stamp therefore exists only for a build that completed every step on inputs that did not move while it ran. - The server's `prepare:runner-vendor` becomes `node scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.mjs`. It reuses the build if the stamp is for this platform and architecture, every recorded output is still there at its recorded size, and the recomputed digest matches. In every other case it removes the stamp and runs `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner build`, the exact command the step ran before. - `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_VENDOR_REBUILD=1` forces the rebuild. **Reason and benefit** 12-16s off the `Build` job and off every other `pnpm build` (the Canary Dry Run's `release.sh` build, local builds), with no change to what a standalone `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build` produces. **Breaking changes** None. The rebuild path runs the same command as before. A fresh checkout, a changed input, a missing or truncated output, an edit that landed during the build, or a stamp from another platform always rebuilds. ## What Changed - `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/build-inputs.mjs` (new): defines the input set, the digest, the output manifest and the reuse decision. Inputs are every file under `packages/paperclip-runner` except `dist`, `dist-browser`, `runner/target`, `node_modules` and dot-directories; every file under `packages/paperclip-eval-kernel` except `dist` and `node_modules` (the Runner's `build:typescript` builds it first); every file under the root `patches` directory (`check:acpx-profiles` hashes `acpx@0.13.1.patch`, and `build-verified-provider-entrypoints.mjs` copies the `pi-acp` and `brace-expansion` patches into `dist/cli/pi-provision-inputs`); and the root `package.json`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `pnpm-workspace.yaml` and `tsconfig.base.json`. The toolchain pins are inside the package (`rust-toolchain.toml`, `runner/Cargo.lock`) and the TypeScript version is in the lockfile, so both are covered. A symlink is hashed as its target path and is not followed. Outputs are every file under `dist`, the tree the server copies wholesale, recorded with their sizes. Exports `beginRunnerBuild`, `recordRunnerBuild` and `assessRunnerBuild` (returns `current` plus a stable reason code: `no_stamp`, `schema_mismatch`, `platform_mismatch`, `missing_output`, `outputs_changed`, `inputs_changed`, `inputs_unchanged`). - `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/record-build-inputs.mjs` (new): the two phases, `--begin` and `--finish`, added as the first and last step of the Runner's `build` in `packages/paperclip-runner/package.json`. Each build chain has its own pending record under `node_modules/.cache/paperclip-runner-build-inputs.pending/`, named after the shell pnpm runs the chain in (the parent of both phases; `--finish` also accepts a record named after its own pid, for a shell that execs the last command of the chain), so two Runner builds running at once in one checkout do not consume each other's record. `--finish` without a pending record for its chain is an error, so the chain cannot silently lose its first step; `--finish` after an edit that landed mid-build prints `not recorded: inputs changed while the build ran` and leaves no stamp. Records of builds that never finished are pruned by the next `--begin` after a day. - `server/scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.mjs` (new): the reuse-or-rebuild step. It resolves the pnpm that is running it through `npm_execpath` with the same rule as the CLI's `resolvePnpmInstallInvocation` (a JavaScript entry runs through this Node, a native executable runs directly, otherwise `pnpm` on PATH). It prints one `paperclip.runner-vendor.timing.v1` line with `action`, `reason`, `check_ms` and `build_ms`, so the saving is measured on this PR's own `Build` job. - `server/package.json`: `prepare:runner-vendor` now runs that script. The `build` and `typecheck` scripts are unchanged. - `server/src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts`: pins the new indirection and the command behind it (imported from the script, so the Dockerfile's standalone path stays pinned), and a new test asserts the Runner's `build` starts with `--begin`, ends with `--finish`, and has exactly those two record steps. - Tests: `packages/paperclip-runner/scripts/build-inputs.test.mjs` (node:test, added to `test:typescript:prep`) and `server/scripts/prepare-runner-vendor.test.mjs` (vitest, in the server lane). - `doc/DEVELOPING.md`: a "Reused Runner build in the server build" section under Test Commands. ## Review findings on the first head, all fixed in [ |
||
|
|
0ea8ebd040 |
fix(test): make the vitest home teardown remove read-only runtime-context bundles (#15931)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Its CI runs the server test suite as twelve `General tests (server
(n/12))` shards on every pull request. Each shard worker gets its own
throwaway `PAPERCLIP_HOME` from
`server/src/__tests__/setup-supertest.ts`, which removes it with a
recursive `rmSync` at worker exit.
> - That removal has been failing now and then with `EACCES, Permission
denied: /tmp/.../paperclip-vitest-home-...` after every test file in the
shard passed (four shard jobs on 2026-10-11 between 14:10Z and 22:10Z,
on four different branches, each attributed to
`native-session-resumption.test.ts` because that file was running in the
worker at exit). Vitest reports it as an unhandled error and fails the
shard, so the job has to be re-run, which costs a full shard (four to
six minutes) on the run's critical path.
> - The directory it cannot remove is one a native session leaves
behind: runtime-context bundles are published under the instance root
(`$PAPERCLIP_HOME/instances/<id>/runtime-context-assets/bundles/<digest>`)
and every directory in them is made read-only by design
(`makeDirectoriesReadOnly` in
`services/native-runtime/runtime-context.ts`). A file inside a read-only
directory cannot be unlinked, so the recursive removal stops with
`EACCES`. Whether such a bundle is under the worker's home at exit
depends on timing: suites set and restore `PAPERCLIP_HOME` for their own
fixtures, and a heartbeat that is still finishing when the worker exits
can publish its bundle under whichever home is current.
> - The teardown is the right place to fix this: the bundle is read-only
on purpose, and the test home is throwaway. On a permission error the
teardown now makes every directory in the tree writable and removes it
again.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the bug
report template.
**What happened?**
A `General tests (server (n/12))` shard fails after all its test files
passed:
```
Vitest caught 1 unhandled error during the test run.
Error: EACCES, Permission denied: /tmp/pv-k2snZS/t/paperclip-vitest-home-qANo1F
❯ Object.rmSync node:fs:1282:18
❯ process.<anonymous> server/src/__tests__/setup-supertest.ts:32:31
This error originated in "server/src/__tests__/native-session-resumption.test.ts" test file.
Test Files 74 passed (74)
Tests 3226 passed | 1 skipped (3227)
Errors 1 error
```
Seen on 2026-10-11 in the first attempt of run 38146108750 (server
(11/12)), run 38150787810 (server (11/12)), run 38178832013 (server
(12/12), branch `fix/windows-opencode-utf8`) and run 38179110043 (server
(11/12), branch `fix/sentry-timeout-assertion-event-id`). The re-run of
the same job passes every time.
**Expected behavior**
A shard whose tests all passed is green. The per-worker test home is
removed at exit whatever a finishing run left in it.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create a directory tree with a read-only directory inside it, the way
`makeDirectoriesReadOnly` publishes a runtime-context bundle: `mkdir -p
home/bundle && touch home/bundle/SKILL.md && chmod 555 home/bundle`.
2. Remove it the way the setup file did: `node -e
"require('fs').rmSync('home', { recursive: true, force: true })"`.
3. The removal throws `EACCES` and leaves the tree behind. The new
`removeTestHome` removes it.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at
|
||
|
|
a96329dfa2 |
fix(test): stop the Sentry timeout assertion matching a random event id (#15929)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Every pull request runs the `Sentry SDK contract` workflow, whose one job installs the real `@sentry/node` outside the workspace and runs `server/src/__tests__/run-failure-sentry-real-sdk.test.ts` to prove that run-failure reports never carry provider output or credentials. > - One of its assertions checks that the captured events do not contain the provider's stderr canary `<html>504 Gateway Time-out private-timeout-credential-canary</html>`, by matching the serialized events against `/private-timeout-|<html>|504|Timed out after/`. > - The bare `504` alternative also matches a Sentry event id. On pull request #15926 (a build-script change that does not touch this code) the job failed because that run's event id was `f353d184e5504ee39db611f2e60f49ff`; the re-run passed. About 0.7% of random 32-character hex ids contain `504`, and the test serializes two events, so roughly one job in seventy fails for no reason. > - This pull request narrows that alternative to `504 Gateway`, which still catches the canary with or without its HTML wrapper and cannot match a hex id. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No GitHub issue exists for this. The description below follows the bug report template. **Pre-submission checklist** - [x] I have searched existing open and closed issues and this is not a duplicate. - [x] I am on the latest released version of Paperclip (or can reproduce on `master`). - [x] I have confirmed the error originates in Paperclip itself — not in my agent adapter, API provider, or local configuration. **What happened?** The `Sentry SDK contract` job (`Real Sentry SDK isolation`) failed on pull request #15926 at head |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
18a133a1a3 |
Merge origin/master into task workspace ownership
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * origin/master: docs(release): align 2026.1006.0-beta.0 stable notes header with v2026.1012.0 (#16000) fix: use Hermes adapter API URL env in prompt (#9425) |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
16fc6daaf4 |
Preserve privacy across overlapping roots and isolated workspace copies
Authorize canonical parent and child ownership, retain configured roots before detachment, and preserve source/task privacy before worktree copying and provisioning. Recheck target writers and retained readers without requiring writes to isolated source folders. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin FoleyandClaude Fable 5.1
|
f8798aac1e |
docs(release): align 2026.1006.0-beta.0 stable notes header with v2026.1012.0 (#16000)
<!-- Write all pull request text in Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release pipeline promotes a soaked beta to stable. The stable job publishes `releases/beta/v<beta-version>.md` from `master` as the GitHub Release body, pinned at dispatch time. > - Beta `2026.1006.0-beta.0` (source `22a3ea3414e9039a538fbb0374b3cfa7fc4371eb`, 130 commits after v2026.1005.0) has soaked for more than three days. The stable version for 2026-10-12 is `v2026.1012.0`. > - The curated notes from #15388 were written at beta time. They guess `v2026.1009.0` and `2026-10-09`, which did not ship. > - A pre-dispatch audit confirmed the commit count, the PR cross-check, the migration range, the environment defaults, and the Contributors handles. Only the header, the date, the intro version, and the contributor count are stale. > - This pull request corrects those four lines before the stable dispatch, so the public release page shows the version that ships. > - The benefit is that the GitHub Release body and the canonical notes file agree with the npm version and the git tag. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Docs: release notes. **Where is the issue?** `releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md` on `master`. **What's wrong?** The notes carry a guessed stable version and date from beta time: - The H1 reads `# Paperclip v2026.1009.0` and the next line reads `> Released: 2026-10-09`. No `v2026.1009.0` stable shipped. The stable that promotes this beta on 2026-10-12 resolves to `v2026.1012.0`. - The intro paragraph names `v2026.1009.0` for the same reason. - The Contributors line says 8 contributors. `git shortlog -sn v2026.1005.0..22a3ea3414e9039a538fbb0374b3cfa7fc4371eb` lists 10 authors. Excluding `github-actions[bot]` gives 9 (this count includes `dependabot[bot]`, as the v2026.916.0 notes did). Paperclip Cloud changes in the range (#15314, #15340) stay out of these notes. The notes do not cite them today, and this change does not add them. **Suggested fix** Change the version in the H1 and the intro paragraph to `v2026.1012.0`, change the Released line to `2026-10-12`, and change the contributor count to 9. Change nothing else. ## What Changed - Line 1: `# Paperclip v2026.1009.0` → `# Paperclip v2026.1012.0`. - Line 3: `> Released: 2026-10-09` → `> Released: 2026-10-12`. - Line 5: the intro paragraph now starts `Paperclip v2026.1012.0 carries 130 commits`. - Contributors: `from 8 contributors` → `from 9 contributors`. - No other lines changed. The 130-commit count, the cited PR numbers, the `0294`–`0305` migration range, the environment defaults, and the external handles were already correct. ## Verification - Docs only. `scripts/release.sh stable --print-version --date 2026-10-12` on `master` prints `2026.1012.0`, which matches the new header. - `git rev-list --count v2026.1005.0..22a3ea3414e9039a538fbb0374b3cfa7fc4371eb` is 130, which matches the notes. - All 89 PR numbers cited in the notes are in that range. The 40 uncited in-range PRs are 23 Dependabot bumps, one lockfile refresh, six test-only changes, five release-notes and contributor-docs changes, one CODEOWNERS change, two evals changes, one release-smoke test change, and two Paperclip Cloud changes (#15314, #15340). - Migrations `0294`–`0305` match `packages/db/src/migrations` in the range. `0298` is the only migration that updates existing rows. - Defaults were read at the beta source: `--listen-port` defaults to 43127 in `paperclip-runnerd.rs`; silent-run thresholds are 5 and 15 minutes in the sandbox runtime; remote Codex accepts `0.149.0` up to but excluding `0.161.0` in `codex-runtime-compatibility.ts`; pins are Codex `0.160.0`, Claude Agent SDK `0.3.286`, OpenCode `1.18.34`; Sonnet 5.5 needs Claude Code `2.1.284` or later. - `git shortlog -sn` over the range gives 9 contributors excluding `github-actions[bot]`. The external handles are `@baozdemir`, `@valentinpalkovic`, and `@abderbejaoui`, which the notes already list. - `git diff --stat` shows one file, 4 insertions, 4 deletions. ## Risks Low. Documentation only. This must merge before the stable dispatch, because the stable job pins the `master` revision of this file at dispatch time. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Fable 5.1 (`claude-fable-5-1`) via Claude Code, with 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 (docs only; no tests apply) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (none apply) - [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 (running) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (running) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>canary/v2026.1012.0-canary.10 |
||
|
|
2145925f71 |
fix: use Hermes adapter API URL env in prompt (#9425)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The Hermes adapter builds the command environment and renders the prompt that tells Hermes how to call back into Paperclip. > - Adapter configuration can provide `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` through `config.env`, which is often the most precise API base for the spawned worker. > - The current prompt rendering path does not read that adapter env value when deciding which Paperclip API base to show. > - This can leave Hermes with prompt instructions that point at a less appropriate process-level or public URL, even though the adapter env contains the intended API base. > - This pull request makes prompt rendering honor the adapter env value before falling back to broader process defaults. > - The benefit is a more consistent Hermes prompt without changing command execution behavior. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Adapter: Hermes Agent or provider Hermes local adapter. Why this adapter is useful The Hermes adapter lets Paperclip run Hermes-backed agents while preserving Paperclip run context and callback instructions. How the agent is invoked Paperclip spawns the configured Hermes command and passes a rendered prompt plus adapter-provided environment variables. What happened? When `PAPERCLIP_API_URL` is supplied through adapter env, the Hermes subprocess receives it, but the prompt can still render its API base from a process-level fallback instead of that configured adapter env value. Expected behavior If an explicit `paperclipApiUrl` option is not configured, the prompt should prefer `config.env.PAPERCLIP_API_URL` when present, then fall back to the existing defaults. Related context: supersedes NousResearch/hermes-paperclip-adapter#118 for Paperclip's bundled Hermes adapter. ## What Changed - Added a small env-value resolver for raw string values and `{ value: string }` wrappers. - Builds a prompt-specific config that uses `config.env.PAPERCLIP_API_URL` when `paperclipApiUrl` is not explicitly set. - Added a focused command-resolution test that verifies the rendered prompt API base uses the adapter env URL instead of the process fallback. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter test:command-resolution` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/hermes-paperclip-adapter build` ## Risks Low risk. This only affects prompt rendering for Hermes adapter runs where `paperclipApiUrl` is unset and `config.env.PAPERCLIP_API_URL` is present. Explicit `paperclipApiUrl` values keep precedence, and existing fallback behavior remains in place when the env value is absent. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.5, tool-enabled coding session with local shell, Git, and GitHub CLI validation. ## 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: zocomputer <help@zocomputer.com> Co-authored-by: commitperclip[bot] <284812584+commitperclip[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d11cf62985 |
Merge origin/master into task workspace ownership
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> * origin/master: fix(docker): skip the full-tree ownership walk on routine boots (#15992) refactor(chat): isolate Telegram, Slack, GitHub and Discord workflows (#15976) |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
680431b5c1 |
Close low-trust repository acquisition and preserve workspace lifecycle defaults
Reject new controller clones for low-trust tasks, reuse only verified existing public checkouts, accept eligible idle repository requests, and carry Telegram destination defaults through migration. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
4f399cec9f |
fix(docker): skip the full-tree ownership walk on routine boots (#15992)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The Docker image keeps all instance state under `PAPERCLIP_HOME`,
and deployments mount a volume there
> - Before it drops privileges, the entrypoint makes sure that the
`node` user owns the home (#10530)
> - The ownership probe is a first-mismatch `find` over the whole tree.
When ownership is correct, `-quit` never fires, so every boot stats
every file on the volume
> - On homes with many agent worktrees and `node_modules` trees, this
walk takes minutes before Node starts. That is close to common 300s
healthcheck windows
> - This pull request keeps a cheap shallow probe on every boot. It runs
the full-tree probe only once per volume and node UID/GID, and records
the result in a marker file
> - The benefit is that routine boots no longer scale with the file
count, and the original root-owned-volume fix stays in place
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #10431 (the open follow-up about the remaining cost of the
ownership walk). Related: #10530 (the change that added the full-tree
probe).
**What happened?**
On a hosted multi-instance deployment, we measured the time from
container start to the first app log line. Instances with many files on
the volume (agent worktrees with `node_modules`) took about 190-235s.
Small instances took 5-22s. One 30 GB volume with few files took 24s, so
the cost follows the file count, not the volume size. Almost all of this
time is the `find "$home_dir" \( ! -user node -o ! -group node \) -print
-quit` walk in `scripts/docker-entrypoint.sh`. When ownership is already
correct, `-quit` never fires, so the walk stats every inode on every
boot.
**Expected behavior**
When ownership is already correct, the entrypoint pre-start phase is
short and does not depend on the number of files in `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. A
fresh root-owned volume, a UID/GID remap, and an upgrade from an older
image are still repaired before the privilege drop.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the image with a volume on `/paperclip` that holds a few hundred
thousand files, all owned by `node:node`.
2. Restart the container.
3. Compare the container start time with the first server log line. The
gap grows with the file count, even though no `chown` runs.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
a2ac5c2715 |
refactor(chat): isolate Telegram, Slack, GitHub and Discord workflows (#15976)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work. > - Chat channels connect that work to external conversations. > - The shared chat service still contains provider-specific workflows. > - Those workflows are hard to inspect in a 34,000-line file. > - This stack extracts Telegram, Slack, GitHub and Discord workflows into their channel folders. > - Shared authorization and service lifetime remain explicit. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #15823, #15834, #15836, #15844 and #15845. Root of the second behavior-preserving channel-folder refactor stack. The dependent PRs #15979, #15981, #15985 and #15987 have merged into this branch; this PR lands all five extractions on master. ## What Changed - Move Telegram maintenance and subscription repair into `chat-channels/telegram/maintenance.ts`. - Move Slack session stopping and task starts into `chat-channels/slack/session-stop.ts` and `task-start.ts`. - Move GitHub webhook intake and recovery into `chat-channels/github/webhook-ingress.ts`. - Move Discord command registration and handling into `chat-channels/discord/commands.ts`. - Share type-only runtime records while preserving shared authorization, transactions, live lease checks and worker ownership. - Reduce the original service from 34,603 to 29,897 lines, removing 4,706 lines (13.6%). ## Verification - All 205 selected integration cases passed before and after their respective extractions: Telegram 41, Slack session stop 2 multi-step scenarios, GitHub 84, Slack task start 25 and Discord 53. Each dependent PR records its focused reproduction command. - Server typecheck, module boundaries and whitespace checks passed. - Per-slice syntax comparisons passed for moved declarations and remaining service statements, allowing only the documented live callback substitutions. - Tests exercise the public service with disposable databases and fixture provider transports. They do not claim live third-party execution. - Cumulative workspace typecheck and build passed on the final stack. - Current-head CI passed on the combined stack commit `d5b37dbe512e3e199932b6608cdc17639eda555a`; Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved threads. - The [original serialized shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38266518817/job/114870022249) timed out in unchanged `adapter-auth-signal-routes.test.ts`. The exact case passed locally without changes, and the [single job retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38266518817/job/114874019933) passed. The original timeout remains recorded. Reproduce the original Telegram slice’s focused suite: ```sh pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/chat-channels.integration.test.ts -t 'Telegram durable private draft Stop|Telegram maintenance|Telegram webhook|Telegram.*(pause|remove)|Telegram.*commands' ``` - Cumulative local `pnpm test:run` exited 1: the first server group had **18,770 passed, 105 skipped, and one timeout** in unchanged `server/src/services/workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts:56` (300,000 ms on macOS). The fail-fast runner did not reach its later workspace and serialized groups. An unchanged isolated rerun passed using the existing timeout; this does not turn the original full run green. The test and its Git utility code are outside this refactor; all current-head CI jobs passed. - Reproduce that diagnostic alone: `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/workspace-git-snapshot-streaming.test.ts`. ## Risks - Credential lease ownership and provider-confirmation ordering must remain unchanged. Existing rotation, lease-loss, recovery and durable Stop cases pass. - The channel factories create no workers or timers and preserve live runtime, shutdown and gateway-ownership reads. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and repository tools. The exact runtime model ID and context-window size are not exposed in this session. No separate agent was used. ## 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
29c37bb1fe |
Clean immutable cache directories from isolated test homes safely
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
836ca0dd4d |
Merge origin/master repository skills and regenerate task migration sequence
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Dotta
|
a9830414c7 |
Preserve repository dependencies when importing GitHub skills (#15731)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its Skills library imports reusable instructions from GitHub. > - Some skills depend on shared files and sibling skills outside their folders. > - Directory-only imports lose those dependencies. > - This pull request keeps repository files together and lets users select which skills appear in the library. > - Agents receive the original files and paths through the existing skill delivery system. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14713. Related: #13656. **Current behavior** GitHub imports copy independent skill directories. Shared scripts, policies, helper skills, and credit files can be omitted. One shared-file error can block every skill. **Proposed behavior** New imports keep repository files together at the scanned commit. Show all skills with their folders and select every skill by default. Collapse individual package files. Omit unsupported or oversized files with a warning. Import available content without repair choices or an extra confirmation. Keep warnings on the saved source. **Reason and benefit** Skills can read their shared repository files after Paperclip delivers them to an agent. Original instructions stay unchanged. Users can inspect included files and understand omissions before and after import. ## What Changed - Store immutable company-scoped repository snapshots and associate them with skill versions. Regenerate the migration after merging master. - Preserve original bytes, binary encoding, and executable modes. Shared-file changes version each usable selected skill. Pinned versions retain their original files. - Deliver a discovery wrapper with the original tree under `.paperclip-repository/`. Preserve invocation policy when present. Fork and create-from-existing retain repository files. - Keep repository files together for new UI imports. Show every skill, select all by default, and collapse package files. Remove the packaging-mode menu. Keep the mobile import footer visible. - Warn about symlinks, submodules, oversized files, missing references, and invalid optional manifests. A malformed skill remains selected with a Needs setup warning. Usable skills still publish, and its original file remains repository support content. Source warnings persist through refresh. Unsafe execution and secret-disclosure findings omit the affected files before snapshot publication. - Expose saved repository files in the installed skill viewer, including binary encoding and executable flags. Reads use the immutable company-scoped snapshot; relative instruction links resolve from their original repository directory. - Audit delivered inventories and derive trust from all repository files. Accept evaluation prose while retaining dynamic-execution findings. Read blobs in one bounded Git batch and check budgets before reading support files. Imports never execute setup commands. - Add scanner, database, delivery, UI, and browser regressions. Update Storybooks, screenshots, and documentation. ## Verification - 69 focused scanner, Git snapshot, delivery, and PostgreSQL lifecycle tests passed. They cover partial imports, warning persistence, missing references, binary files, executable modes, copies, pinned versions, cancellation, company isolation, and batched Git reads. - 110 import, skill-detail, selection-tree, saved-file link, and Markdown renderer tests passed. A file-switch regression failed before the resolver fix and passed afterward. Browser walkthroughs cover the all-selected open tree, repository preview, non-blocking warnings, missing references, setup problems, warning persistence, and mobile layout. - Full workspace typecheck and build passed. Runner E2E TypeScript checks and design-token gates passed. The full serial local suite was attempted and stopped after over an hour. The existing 40,000-file Git streaming stress test failed after 303 seconds on macOS; the broad local suite is not counted as passed. All 55 applicable PR checks passed on the final commit, including the full sharded CI suite. Two optional Storybook workflows were skipped; the five local Storybook walkthroughs passed. - On October 12, live campaigns imported the private Poteto repository through the production GitHub Sources UI, selected architect and bro, and invoked them with native Codex on local and Daytona. The source connection was disabled before invocation. Independent filesystem inspections matched every supported Git blob, size, and executable mode. Both tasks completed and cleanup passed. Campaigns: `local-2026-10-12T15-07-39-504Z` (both environments), `local-2026-10-12T16-08-39-682Z` (local), and `local-2026-10-12T16-03-33-938Z` (Daytona). Each of the two selected skills received all 234 supported repository files. Later changes only affect the installed-file viewer and documentation. This qualifies skill delivery and instruction reads, not every Poteto workflow or adapter. - A manual source-checkout test drive imported a synthetic private GitHub repository with a symlink, an oversized file, a missing reference, and malformed skill metadata. Available skills published with their shared checklist. The walkthrough found duplicate warning text after import; the final UI fix removes that duplicate. The file viewer exposes saved repository dependencies and resolves authored relative links without changing the instructions. A follow-up live refresh omitted unsafe helper files with warnings, preserved every safe file byte, and survived a server restart. Screenshots below use the production UI with Storybook fixtures. They do not replace the live GitHub and runtime checks. <details> <summary>All skills visible and selected by default</summary>  </details> <details> <summary>Import stays available with warnings</summary>  </details> <details> <summary>Repository file inspector</summary>  </details> <details> <summary>Mobile import</summary>  </details> ## Risks - Each selected skill carries a repository copy in the runtime. The database stores each snapshot once. Runtime transfer and storage increase with the number of assigned skills. - Runtime budgets remain: 9,990 repository entries, 1 MiB per file, and 61 MiB total. File omissions are recorded as warnings. Source-access or download failures retain installed versions. - Import success does not prove that every skill can run. Environment dependencies, credentials, delegation tools, and schedules still need configuration. Imported setup scripts are not executed. - Live runtime coverage is native Codex on local and Daytona. Other adapters use the shared delivery path but were not exercised in these campaigns. The roadmap marks Skills Manager as shipped. This extends the existing importer. Related pull requests were checked. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, automated tests, and browser tools. The exact deployment identifier and context-window size were 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 mergecanary/v2026.1012.0-canary.8 |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1b98e5df2f |
Enforce shared-root write authority and recover low-disk exports safely
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
52ea8711ef |
Merge origin/master instruction working-copy extraction
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ce08872dfb |
refactor(heartbeat): extract instruction working-copy lifecycle (#15984)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip runs agent tasks and preserves their managed agent files. > - Heartbeat must prepare a private copy, collect stopped-provider edits, and retain ownership during warm-session handoff. > - That lifecycle is spread across preparation, adapter callbacks, and cleanup. > - A per-run controller can own the copy and receipt while the executor retains teardown ordering. > - This PR moves that coordination into a dedicated module. > - Live getters preserve updated state and partially acquired resources. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of heartbeat instruction preparation. This is the second and final PR in this batch, originally stacked on #15980. That dependency is now merged; this PR is rebased onto its squash merge with an identical patch and identical touched-file contents. Related-PR search found no duplicate extraction. **Current behavior** After #15980, `heartbeat.ts` has 4,215 lines and 173,657 bytes. It coordinates instruction-copy preparation, save receipts, warm handoffs, and deferred cleanup inline. **Proposed behavior** `heartbeat/instruction-working-copy.ts` owns the per-run lifecycle in 233 lines. `heartbeat.ts` becomes 4,055 lines and 162,520 bytes. The executor retains the outer release order, unavailable-copy reporting, and environment/service cleanup policy. **Reason and benefit** The copy, save receipt, and warm ownership are readable together. The remaining executor names preparation and dispatch phases without obscuring teardown decisions. **Breaking changes** None intended. All 140 named public heartbeat exports remain unchanged. ## What Changed - Extract copy preparation, save/checkpoint callbacks, warm reservation/adoption, prompt guidance, and the deferred-release closure. - Read the executor's current run row through a callback; expose current copies, receipts, and acquired cleanup handles through live getters. - Keep cleanup handles available after preparation failure, and preserve release-before-retry on invalidated warm reuse. - Add four public-path characterization tests with real disposable PostgreSQL and files, plus four direct boundary tests. - Add isolated browser acceptance with a real process that edits instructions, completes its task, and reads the saved bytes on its next task. - Document the boundary and opt-in acceptance command. ## Verification - **Before extraction:** four new public-path tests pass on the original implementation, as do 108 existing instruction-copy/directory/native-cleanup tests. The two-task browser journey also passes on the baseline server. - **After extraction:** all 112 baseline tests pass; all four new boundary tests pass; 12 selected native-session ownership/retirement cases pass (the other 670 cases were outside this focused selection). - **Browser acceptance:** the fresh extracted-code server passes the full two-task journey (25.9 seconds): real child-process edits, saved/unchanged receipts, canonical bytes through the agent-file API, next-task restore, completed task UI, and copy cleanup. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, final server typecheck, and `pnpm build` pass. Module-boundary and public-export checks pass. - Normalized syntax comparison confirms all moved bodies and the reconstructed executor match the base, accounting explicitly for live run getters and delegation. - Final rebased head: `a08872c97e587a21ffc0fc6b78f34b81e484e7b0`. Combined entry-point and boundary regressions pass again (12/12); fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with no findings. All 55 current-head checks pass (two configured skips), including the hosted full-suite tests, build, typecheck, and all eight browser shards. There are no open review threads. ## Risks - Acquisition can succeed before preparation throws. Boundary tests verify that both the reservation and a transferred copy remain visible to the cleanup owner. - Callbacks can replace copy/save state during execution. Public tests verify saved receipts; direct tests verify the current run row, warm checkpoint receipt, and permission-root preservation. - Missing edit authorization and cleanup failure must remain nonfatal. Characterization tests revoke actual membership after dispatch admission and inject a cleanup error while preserving the saved result. - The browser uses a test-launcher-only instruction-capable wrapper around the real process adapter. Production adapter capabilities are unchanged. No live provider calls are made; native warm ownership is covered by focused module and native-session tests rather than a live provider browser run. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool execution, and verification. The exact deployment 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
|
e2825f0f14 |
Merge origin/master test coverage consolidation
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1e0cfcb4fc |
test: retire redundant suites and consolidate owner coverage (#15978)
Retire duplicate ACPX and Codex proof after migrating unique assertions to their behavioral owners. Consolidate repeated fixtures and exact case matrices while preserving lifecycle, protocol, company, credential, approval, and ordering contracts. Remove the unused runtime-controls compatibility path and document test ownership and preservation evidence. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e7d07f00a3 |
Merge origin/master runtime service extraction
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
94e4218310 |
refactor(heartbeat): extract runtime service coordination (#15980)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Heartbeat runs start workspace services and receive service reports from adapters. > - Service context updates and readiness notices are spread through the executor. > - These steps share a clear responsibility, while process and lease ownership already live elsewhere. > - This pull request puts service coordination in one module. > - The executor retains the same dispatch and cleanup order. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Maintenance of heartbeat execution. This is the first of two final focused extractions after #15973. Related #15653 changes runtime callback origins; this PR preserves that policy. **Current behavior** `heartbeat.ts` has 4,372 lines and 178,459 bytes. It validates service intents, starts services, persists adapter reports and primary URLs, and posts readiness notices inline. **Proposed behavior** `heartbeat/runtime-services.ts` owns those steps in 212 lines. `heartbeat.ts` becomes 4,215 lines and 173,657 bytes. Process registries and leases stay in `workspace-runtime.ts`. The executor still releases services in its original cleanup path. **Reason and benefit** Service coordination has named preparation and result phases. The execution path is easier to read without changing service lifetime or moving cleanup policy. **Breaking changes** None intended. All 140 named public heartbeat exports remain available, including `postWorkspaceReadyComment`. ## What Changed - Move service-intent validation, startup, adapter-result persistence, and readiness notices into one module. - Preserve mutable run context, primary URL selection, notice error handling, and release ordering. - Add four public-path tests using disposable PostgreSQL, real HTTP service processes, and a fixture adapter. - Extend browser recovery acceptance to fetch the actual service URL, check the readiness notice, and verify listener cleanup. - Update the module map and acceptance instructions. ## Verification - Before extraction: all five tests pass, including the four new characterization cases and existing notice formatting test. - After extraction: all 17 tests pass across service coordination, notice formatting, output recording, and runtime authorization. - Structural comparison confirms that all moved bodies and the reconstructed executor match the baseline. Module boundary checks pass. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. - Extended isolated browser acceptance: **2/2 pass** (3.7 minutes), covering actual service readiness, recovery, bounded failure, and cleanup. At `8e33e2032de681082f128470eb8ab0711b382afe`, all 55 current-head checks pass (two configured skips), including hosted full-suite tests. Greptile is 5/5 with no findings or review threads. ## Risks - Service context must be persisted before adapter dispatch and before run completion. The tests inspect both phases and preserve the first service URL when adapter reports arrive. - Notice failures must remain nonfatal. The public-path test checks both startup and result notices. - Shared services must survive run cleanup; ephemeral services must stop after success or failure. Tests use actual processes and HTTP requests. - The fixture supplies UUID service report IDs, as required by the database. The existing generated-ID fallback for reports without IDs is outside this extraction. - Test adapters and services are local fixtures; these tests make no live provider calls. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, assisted with reasoning, code edits, tool execution, and verification. The exact deployment 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
|
ea1a20ec45 |
Preserve workspace ownership during archive relocation
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
725614f9c4 |
Merge origin/master and preserve task workspace behavior across service extractions
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
