2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	59eee4829c	fix(inbox): stop archived items from resurfacing (#9931) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane operators use to coordinate AI-agent companies and review work needing attention. > - The Inbox is the operator-facing surface that aggregates tasks requiring attention across server state and shared client polling. > - Archiving a task optimistically removed it, but ordinary background activity and stale polling responses could make it reappear seconds later. > - The server therefore needs to distinguish genuine user-attention events from routine agent/system activity. > - The client also needs a bounded local archive guard across every Inbox query path while the server mutation and in-flight polls settle. > - This pull request fixes both resurrection paths and adds race-focused regression coverage. > - The benefit is stable archive behavior without hiding a genuine archive failure after reconciliation or reload. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description ### Pre-submission checklist - [x] Searched existing open and closed issues and pull requests; no duplicate implementation was found. - [x] Reproduced on `master` before this branch. - [x] Confirmed this is a Paperclip core bug, not adapter or provider behavior. ### What happened? Archiving an Inbox task hid it optimistically, then background refresh activity could insert it back into the list seconds later. ### Expected behavior A successfully archived task remains hidden during normal polling. A genuine failed archive may become visible again after reconciliation or reload. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Open Inbox with a visible task. 2. Archive the task. 3. Wait for shared polling or routine agent activity to refresh task data. 4. Observe the archived task reappear without a hard page refresh. ### Paperclip version or commit `master` before this branch. ### Deployment mode Built from source using the local development application. ### Installation method Built from source (`pnpm`). ### Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific; this is a core Inbox bug. ### Database mode Not database-mode-specific. ### Access context Board (human operator). ### Additional context The failure had independent server and client causes: routine activity could resurface archived rows server-side, while stale shared-poll responses could bypass optimistic client removal. ## What Changed - Restrict server-side Inbox resurfacing to explicit user-attention events rather than any issue activity write. - Add a bounded client-side archive guard with confirmation, failure restoration, and cache reconciliation behavior. - Apply the guard to Inbox rendering, badge counts, optimistic cache updates, and shared-poll result application. - Classify the generic compact Inbox query so stale shared-poll data cannot bypass the guard. - Add server visibility-matrix tests and UI race-condition regression tests. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/hooks/useSharedPolling.test.ts src/lib/inboxArchiveCache.test.ts src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` — 25 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts` — 107 passed. - Branch rebased cleanly onto current `origin/master` before push. ## Risks - Low-to-moderate behavioral risk: resurfacing is intentionally narrower, so the server tests cover human comments, mentions, interactions, and status transitions that must still regain attention. - The client guard is bounded and cleared on mutation failure, limiting the risk of hiding a task whose archive did not persist. - No schema, migration, public API, workflow, dependency-lock, or visual-token changes. > 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 - Anthropic Claude via Claude Code (`claude_local`; prior implementation/review run, exact underlying model ID and context window were not retained in the handoff metadata), with repository tool use and test execution. - OpenAI `gpt-5.5` via Codex CLI for final review repair and PR preparation, with reasoning, repository editing, GitHub tooling, 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/described the result 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 and contains no internal Paperclip task identifier - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation where needed; no documentation change is required for this bug fix - [x] I have considered and documented risks above - [x] All Paperclip-authored commits include the required co-author trailer --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-07-21 08:13:14 -05:00
Dotta	f40a8fbf1e	[codex] Fix iOS inbox archive gestures (#9154) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The board inbox is a high-frequency operator surface, especially on mobile where row gestures are the primary way to dismiss handled work. > - The existing swipe archive control shared one pending-state gate across the inbox, so one archive request could make other inbox archive controls feel stuck. > - The touch handler also kept click suppression and archive timers coupled too loosely, which made cancelled or partial iOS touch sequences behave unpredictably. > - This pull request keeps archive state per issue, makes swipe/cancel cleanup explicit, and removes archived issues from every relevant inbox query cache before navigation/refetch. > - The benefit is that iOS users can archive from inbox/detail views without the inbox getting into a weird pending or stale-cache state. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Bug report: - Summary: On iOS/mobile, inbox swipe/archive interactions can leave the inbox feeling stuck or stale after archiving a task. - Expected: Archiving one inbox item should remove that item optimistically, keep other archive controls usable, and recover cleanly from partial or cancelled touch gestures. - Actual: A pending archive globally disabled other archive controls, touch cancellation could share the touch-end path, and issue-detail archive navigation could happen before related inbox query caches were cleaned up. - Root cause: Archive pending state and inbox cache updates were handled locally in multiple places instead of through reusable per-company cache helpers, and the swipe component did not independently track live offset, archive timers, and click-suppression timers. ## What Changed - Split `SwipeToArchive` archive timeout handling from temporary click suppression and added explicit touch-cancel/reset cleanup. - Track swipe offset in a ref so commit threshold checks use the latest touch position rather than potentially stale React state. - Added shared inbox archive cache helpers for cancelling, snapshotting, optimistic removal, rollback, and invalidation across inbox query variants. - Updated inbox archive mutations to disable only the row being archived instead of every row while any archive request is pending. - Updated issue-detail archive-from-inbox to remove the archived issue from cached inbox variants before navigating back. - Added focused tests for partial drags, cancelled touches, unmount cleanup, per-row pending archive behavior, and detail-page cache removal before navigation. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/SwipeToArchive.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx ui/src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx` - 3 test files passed - 53 tests passed ## Risks Low-to-medium risk. This changes mobile archive gesture state and optimistic inbox cache handling, so the main risk is cache invalidation missing an inbox query variant. The helper uses prefix-based React Query APIs for the known inbox variants and still invalidates those variants plus sidebar badges on settle. > 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 based coding agent, with repository tool use and local command execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Related PR search performed with `gh search prs "inbox archive iOS swipe" --repo paperclipai/paperclip` and `gh search prs "SwipeToArchive" --repo paperclipai/paperclip`; existing related work includes #1857 and #1860, but no duplicate of this regression fix was found.	2026-07-07 07:22:42 -05:00