mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 09:37:19 +01:00
274d50430d86ef42ca0a3417ae8f89581fbf4e60
4
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
cd5f930558 |
Add shareable image galleries to task documents (#18157)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start --> https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/247/changes/paperclip/247 <!-- entire-trail-link-end --> ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task documents hold plans, reports, and image evidence. > - Task attachments already have an image gallery. > - Inline document images had no gallery navigation or image links. > - This change gives each document a gallery that uses the existing modal. > - People can review the image sequence and share a link to one image. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Image review in task documents, including the side panel and Classic interface. **Current behavior** Inline document images do not open a gallery. People cannot move through them with arrow keys or share a link to one image. **Proposed behavior** Select an image to open the gallery. Use arrow keys or Previous and Next. The URL records its one-based position, for example `#document-report&image=2`. Reloading that URL opens the selected image. Revision links keep their exact saved content. **Reason and benefit** People can inspect a document's image evidence in reading order and share the exact view. No matching issue was found. The latest 300 open PR titles were checked for related document gallery work. ## What Changed - Add a document renderer that collects rendered images in reading order, including reference-style and repeated images. - Reuse the gallery modal with optional index-change and focus-return controls. - Keep the document owner in the saved tab identity when people switch between local and other-task documents. - Match explicit current-task document owners with local document tabs. Keep review and viewer parameters during gallery navigation. - Treat another Classic review receipt as a new request while image navigation retains the selected revision. - Make inline image controls work with a keyboard. Keep focus in the modal and restore focus on close. - Keep document, revision, review, and maximized-view link parameters during image navigation. - Fix a Classic revision-cache race found by the browser test. Recheck a pinned revision when the saved document head changes. - Update the feature and agent access maps. No new server API or permission is needed. ## Verification - Passed 119 focused tests for document galleries, the shared gallery, document rendering, the revision panel, and hash routing. - Passed all 3 Chromium journeys: desktop, mobile, and Classic. These use real uploads and saved document revisions. - The browser journeys also check explicit current-task owners, review parameters after reopening, other-task links after tab switches, and a second Classic review link after Return to latest. - Browser checks cover keyboard and button navigation, wraparound, shared-link reload, exact historical content, invalid positions, focus return and containment, scroll locking, and Escape, Close, and backdrop dismissal. - UI typecheck, token gates, map checks, and diff whitespace checks passed. - The UI production build passed in the browser harness. - Earlier browser runs found and then verified the Classic revision-cache fix. A later build exited 137 while the full test suite ran. The browser run passed after that suite stopped. - Full repository typecheck and build could not complete because Cargo is absent. The full repository test run did not complete within this sandbox. These checks remain subject to CI. ## Risks - Image positions follow document reading order. Editing an unpinned document can change those positions. A revision link retains the saved sequence. - The shared modal now uses Radix Escape handling. The existing gallery tests and nested mobile dialog journey pass. - No schema change or migration. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex. The runtime did not expose a more specific model ID or context window size. Used reasoning, code editing, 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 - [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> |
||
|
Michael NguyenandClaude Fable 5
|
2a5aa5e213 |
feat(ui): viewer=full document deep link opens the maximized side pane (#12812)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents ask humans for decisions through approval cards, and a chat gateway plugin can forward those cards to Slack with an "Open task" button > - The button opens the bare task page; to read the document under approval, the reviewer must click four more times (open the side pane, open the Artifacts tab, open the artifact, maximize the pane) > - Approvals are the highest-frequency human touchpoint, so each removed click matters > - This pull request adds a `viewer=full` option to the existing `#document-<key>` deep link; the link now opens the target document and maximizes the side pane > - The benefit is one-click access from an external notification to a full-size reading surface for the document under approval ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The issue page already supports `#document-<key>` deep links. They open the document in the side pane, but at the pane's default width. **Current behavior** An external link cannot request the maximized (full-size) document view. A reviewer who follows an approval notification must maximize the pane by hand each time. **Proposed behavior** `#document-<key>&viewer=full` opens the document and maximizes the side pane. Plan documents open in the Plan tab, maximized. Mobile keeps the full-screen sheet. Unknown `viewer` values are ignored, so old links and new links stay compatible in both directions. **Reason and benefit** Chat notifications about approvals can now land the reviewer directly on a full-size view of the document they must read. This removes four clicks from every approval review. **Breaking changes** None. The parameter is optional and additive. Links without it keep today's behavior. ## What Changed - `ui/src/lib/document-annotation-hash.ts`: parse and build an optional `viewer=full` parameter in document hashes. - `ui/src/lib/issue-document-deep-link.ts`: thread a `maximize` flag on properties-pane routes; the continuation-summary route is unchanged. - `ui/src/context/PanelContext.tsx`: add a one-shot panel maximize request (`requestPanelMaximize` / `clearPanelMaximizeRequest`). - `ui/src/components/PropertiesPanel.tsx`: the resizable panel host consumes a pending request once it is visible and laid out, then clears it. - `ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.tsx`: request the maximize on the desktop deep-link path only; mobile keeps the sheet. - Tests for all of the above. ## Verification - `cd ui && pnpm typecheck` — clean. - `cd ui && pnpm vitest run src/lib/document-annotation-hash.test.ts src/lib/issue-document-deep-link.test.ts src/components/PropertiesPanel.test.tsx` — 31/31 green. - New cases cover: `viewer` parse/build round trip, unknown values ignored, maximize routing for document and plan tabs, a pending request consumed on mount, and a request held while the panel is hidden. - Manual check: open an issue with `#document-<key>&viewer=full` in the URL; the pane opens on that document, maximized. Remove the parameter; the pane opens at its normal width. ## Risks - Low risk. The parameter is optional; no data, schema, or API changes. - The maximize request lives in React context as a one-shot flag. It is cleared on first consumption, so a stale request cannot re-maximize the pane on later navigations. - If a link carries `viewer=full` on a web build older than this change, the parameter is ignored and the document still opens. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`), Anthropic. Agentic coding session with extended thinking and tool use (file edits, shell, test runs). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [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: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Michael Nguyen
|
d2fb05d225 | Fix issue document deep-link routing (#11551) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
b7545823be |
[codex] Add document annotations and comments (#6733)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies through issues, documents, runs, and durable company-scoped state. > - Issue documents are where agents and operators capture plans, handoffs, and work products. > - Before this change, document collaboration could only happen through whole-document edits and detached issue comments. > - Inline document annotations need stable anchors, revision-aware persistence, and UI affordances that do not break existing document editing. > - This pull request adds company-scoped document annotation threads, comments, anchor snapshots, API routes, and board UI. > - The benefit is that operators and agents can discuss specific document passages without losing context as documents evolve. ## What Changed - Added document annotation tables, schema exports, shared types, validators, anchor hashing, and text-anchor helpers. - Added server-side document annotation services and issue routes for listing, creating, commenting, resolving, and reopening annotation threads. - Included annotation summaries in relevant issue document reads and backup/recovery document workspace behavior. - Added React UI for inline document highlights, comment panels, mobile sheet behavior, deep-link focus, and resolved/open filtering. - Added annotation design artifacts, Storybook coverage, screenshots, and a screenshot helper script. - Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip` `master` and renumbered the annotation migration from `0085_old_swarm` to `0091_old_swarm`; the SQL uses `IF NOT EXISTS` guards so environments that previously applied the old migration number can safely apply the new one. - Adjusted the new annotation UI tests to use a local async flush helper because this workspace's React 19.2.4 export does not expose `React.act`. ## Verification - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/document-anchors.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotation-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/document-annotations-service.test.ts ui/src/components/DocumentAnnotationLayer.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueDocumentAnnotations.test.tsx ui/src/lib/document-annotation-hash.test.ts ui/src/lib/document-annotation-selection.test.ts` - Confirmed `git diff --check` passes. - Confirmed no `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `.github/workflows/*` files are included in the PR diff. ## Risks - Medium risk: this adds new persisted annotation tables and routes across db/shared/server/ui. - Migration risk is reduced by moving the branch migration to `0091_old_swarm` after upstream `0090_resource_memberships` and keeping the SQL idempotent for old `0085_old_swarm` adopters. - UI risk is mostly around text range anchoring and panel positioning across long documents, folded content, and mobile layouts; the PR includes focused unit coverage and design screenshots. > 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, GPT-5 coding agent, tool-using software engineering mode. Context window size is not exposed in this Paperclip runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |