* codex/work-folders-staging-hardening-refresh:
fix: keep supported ACPX profiles available in the Pi layer
test: wait for active Daytona transfers before teardown
* codex/work-folders-runtime-hardening-refresh:
fix: keep supported ACPX profiles available in the Pi layer
test: wait for active Daytona transfers before teardown
* codex/work-folders-storybook-refresh:
fix: keep supported ACPX profiles available in the Pi layer
test: wait for active Daytona transfers before teardown
* codex/work-folders-storybook-refresh:
Include cached directories in selection and recursive trash operations
# Conflicts:
# ui/src/components/WorkFolderBrowser.selection.test.tsx
* codex/work-folders-staging-hardening-refresh:
Preserve upstream local sandbox defaults in environment regression test
Align provider selector tests with current configuration controls
* codex/work-folders-runtime-hardening-refresh:
Preserve upstream local sandbox defaults in environment regression test
Align provider selector tests with current configuration controls
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
* codex/work-folders-staging-hardening-refresh:
Align staging runtime packaging and lifecycle with current master
Preserve the retained identity read limit during runtime upgrade
Preserve active ACPX child snapshots through reusable lease close. Align the canonical provider lock and CLI pins with the current qualified profiles, retain local Git fallback, and preserve narrowed heartbeat values across diagnostics.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Combine task-scoped workspace adoption with chat isolation, bounded shutdown draining, and provider identity handling. Preserve per-run capability rotation evidence and the new master warm-session transition coverage.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep the experimental cached-file entry in task properties and preserve current gallery, task continuation, and development-setting behavior.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Preserve verified Pi and Codex ACP profiles alongside current Claude installation handling, provider recovery, and native attachment staging. Keep preview lock integrity checks on native-architecture image builds.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Keep current task continuation, chat UI, provider security, and multi-architecture build behavior. Regenerate the work-folder schema after the published migration sequence and make it replay-safe for preview databases. Verify preserved file/trash/checkpoint references and company constraints on PostgreSQL.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - The task detail page gives operators a task tree in a mobile side
panel.
> - The mobile sheet did not set an explicit full width.
> - A maximum width rule could make the task tree narrower than the
phone viewport.
> - This pull request makes the mobile task tree sheet use the full
viewport width.
> - The benefit is a consistent and readable task tree on phones.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The task tree sheet could use less than the full viewport width on a
mobile task page.
**Expected behavior**
The task tree sheet must use the full available phone width.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task on a phone viewport.
2. Open the task side panel.
3. Select the Tasks tab.
4. Compare the sheet width with the viewport width.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`7b829efdf`
**Deployment mode**
Built from source.
## What Changed
- Set the mobile task side panel to `w-full` and `max-w-none`.
- Add regression assertions for both width classes.
## Verification
- `vitest run src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx --config vitest.config.ts`
passes 103 tests.
- `node scripts/check-token-gates.mjs` passes all four token gates.
- `git diff --check` passes.
## Risks
- Low risk. The change only affects the mobile task side panel width.
- The desktop panel and other sheet variants do not change.
> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, agentic coding with reasoning and tool use.
## 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>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Paperclip Cloud deploys images built from master commits.
> - Cloud image builds share GitHub-hosted capacity with other
workflows.
> - The organization already operates AWS runners through RunsOn Fleet.
> - This pull request allows approved master builds to use a dedicated
cloud Fleet.
> - The benefit is separate build capacity with a quick operator
rollback.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #13189, #13192.
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Placement of the Docker cloud build after a master merge.
**Current behavior**
Every Docker cloud build uses a GitHub-hosted runner. Busy periods delay
the job.
**Proposed behavior**
An operator variable enables the approved cloud Fleet for canonical
master pushes and manual master builds. Other events, refs, and
repositories use GitHub-hosted runners.
## What Changed
- Add a guarded AWS runner selector to the Docker cloud job.
- Keep the existing image cache, verification, and publication steps.
- Test the selector against master, branch, tag, PR, fork, and disabled
contexts.
- Document provisioning requirements, placement checks, and rollback.
## Verification
- 29 focused Node tests pass for routing, readiness, and disk handling.
- The full workflow-script Node suite passes.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` passes locally.
- The pinned PR routing regression suite passes. The first live PR run
assigned 21 jobs to the approved AWS PR group. AWS then reclaimed 16
Spot instances. The failed run is being repeated on GitHub-hosted
runners while the Fleet moves to On-Demand.
- Actionlint passes with existing shellcheck findings excluded (SC2012,
SC2016, SC2129).
- `git diff --check` passes.
- Greptile reports 5/5 on commit
`764d505a41dd2023751c3f361906fa9ea35bf0c6`, with no review threads.
- All 30 current-head CI checks pass, including typecheck, build, all
server/workspace test shards, Runner verification, and browser tests.
Two Storybook checks are intentionally skipped for this change. Run:
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34630550799
- The broader local test/build sequence is still running. This Mac has
reported failures in unchanged application suites; their complete Linux
CI shards pass. Local targeted workflow tests and typecheck pass.
- Both On-Demand Fleets are deployed and healthy. Live master
cloud-build verification follows the merge.
## Risks
- Missing Fleet capacity or runner-group authorization can leave an AWS
job queued. Disable `AWS_CLOUD_BUILDS_ENABLED` and rerun the workflow to
use GitHub-hosted capacity.
- The runner group must restrict access to this repository and the
master version of `docker-cloud.yml`.
- Docker needs more disk space than the PR Fleet. Provision 120 GiB
disks and retain the free-space check.
- This changes image build placement only. Source verification and
migrator publication remain separate prerequisites.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact serving model identifier and context-window size
are not exposed by this environment.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
