4 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	e40de0c9e8	perf(ci): refresh test weights and narrow graph dependencies (#18464) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors need fast, reliable CI feedback. > - Diff-aware CI selects test files and partitions them into runner jobs. > - Stale cost estimates put several slow suites on the same runner. Broad imports also couple small tests to large modules. > - This PR refreshes test costs, runs independent graph discovery in parallel, and narrows three dependency boundaries. > - Selection safeguards and CODEOWNER-only AWS routing stay in force. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18398. This follows the audit of [PR #18427's verification run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41169978784). The audit found 403 selected general-server files without timing weights. Three suites measured at 232s, 122s and 116s shared one shard because each received a roughly 2s fallback weight. Local graph discovery across four projects took 43.7s serially and 21.7s with two workers. A reverse-order repeat took 37.7s serially and 22.6s with two workers. Both comparisons produced identical selection results. This is a local measurement, not a claim about production CI speed. ## What Changed - Refresh general-server costs for 1,285 of 1,309 current files and serialized costs for all 163 files from two successful protected-master Cloud readiness runs. Retain prior costs for unmeasured files, including dedicated chat and native-runner suites. - Record passing server file costs, including collection, setup and environment preparation. A weekly hosted workflow validates trusted source runs and opens a timing-only PR. It tests shard coverage, pauses while a refresh PR is open, and never merges automatically. - Discover at most two project graphs concurrently in isolated, heap-limited Node processes. Cache repeated inventory reads within one selection. Worker errors and timeouts retain the full task plan. - Fetch only the merge commit and parents for the selector. A real shallow-clone regression proves the complete diff still includes more than 300 files, renames and deletions. - Share the identical log viewer and run details between both AgentDetail pages. The viewer test imports the shared implementation and runs each of its 13 distinct cases once. - Extract the pure API error class while preserving the API client's public exports. Import delivery work signals through their existing narrow DB export. ## Verification - PASS: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - PASS: 284 CI selection, timing, shallow-diff, sharding and routing tests. - PASS: 74 further cache, routing and graph-proof tests. - PASS: 94 targeted UI assertions across the viewer, run invocation, API errors/client and progress helpers. All 76 assertions in the 12 server suites made independently selectable also pass. - PASS: `pnpm check:token-gates`, module-boundary checks, YAML parsing and `git diff --check`. - PASS: [Full PR CI and required `ci / verify` aggregate](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41206683345), including all 12 general-server shards, all nine serialized shards, workspace groups, chat suites, Runner lanes and build checks. - PASS: [GitHub hosted real-workspace selector and cache/routing qualification](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41206683205). - PASS: Both Greptile and Paperclip reviews are 5/5 with no actionable findings or inline comments on `7dc65c51b8`. The PR has no merge conflicts. - PASS: The production refresh parser accepted all 107 structured file-cost records from a real successful server CI job, including setup/loading cost. - Local `pnpm test:run` completed all six chat shards successfully. The duplicate monolithic local run was stopped after the complete remote suite passed; it was not completed locally. The focused log-viewer command improved from 18.84s (26 duplicate variant cases) to 8.49s (all 13 distinct behavior cases). The dependency audit confirms 12 server files and the API-error test no longer need conservative always-run retention. Repartitioning the audited PR with the new costs changes the slowest shard from 810s to 591s of summed historical test execution (1,124 of 1,142 files measured). This is a workload simulation, not measured new CI wall time. ## Risks - Two graph processes use more peak memory. Each has a 2 GiB heap limit and a three-minute timeout. Any failure preserves the original task plan. Real workspace qualification runs in GitHub CI. - Historical logs contain test/hook costs only. New reporter records add loading/setup costs after merge. The manifests identify measurement coverage and source runs. These weights change placement, never permission to skip tests. - Runner load adds timing noise. The refresh uses medians and requires at least 90% measurement coverage in each lane. - GitHub may require approval to run checks on a PR created with `GITHUB_TOKEN`. Refreshes remain reviewable and do not merge themselves. - The shared viewer is a mechanical extraction. Both pages retain their existing exports, and the behavior assertions remain covered. AWS runner authorization is unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, reasoning, code execution and GitHub tools. The exact deployment ID 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 references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused checks and six chat shards; complete suite passed in CI as detailed above) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-31 11:05:12 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	3b84c89885	fix(ci): use complete merge diffs and allow audited documentation (#18362) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and needs reliable checks for each contribution. > - CI selects affected suites and then affected Vitest files before allocating runners. > - Recent runs compared a tested merge against a stale event base. > - That included unrelated master changes and sometimes reached the compare API file cap. > - Ordinary documentation also forced every suite and invalidated test caches. > - This PR reads complete merge trees and exempts a small set of audited prose inputs. > - Tests retain conservative coverage when the diff or an input is uncertain. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18348 and #18214. This is a follow-up to the merged affected-test selector. Related CI performance work: #16513 and #16500 address setup and suite execution. This PR changes diff collection and input classification. ## What Changed - Fetch the exact tested merge and its parents into a temporary bare repository. Read the complete tree diff against the actual first parent. Validate the second parent against the event PR head. Never execute PR code in the routing job. - Carry the immutable base, merge and PR-head identities into the plan. Validate the same complete diff again before file selection. - Use one prose policy across the planner, Vitest selector and task cache adapter. Exempt only `doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/DATABASE.md`, and Markdown under `doc/plans/`. - Keep the uncached typecheck and CLI guidance guard for the first two documents. Keep policy checks for historical plans. Keep existing coverage for all other docs, runtime skills, fixtures and unknown inputs. - Extend candidate-workflow qualification to exercise mixed source and prose changes. ## Verification - Passed: 15 planner and Git routing tests, including a 353-file diff, stale base, rename, deletion, wrong parent and fetch-failure cases. - Passed: 83 routing, Vitest graph, exact selection, workflow and real Turbo cache checks. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures in native-session and Muse tests. It did not pass or complete. The exact cause remains unverified. The changed files do not include those tests or their database setup. Linux CI results are recorded below. - Passed: real mixed Inbox/source/prose graph qualification selected 699/911 workspace test files, preserving the source-only selection. - Passed: both GitHub CI qualification jobs, including real mixed source/prose Vitest selection. Greptile reviewed commit `10ac6f5ec9` at 5/5 with no findings. - First full CI attempt: the [chat shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124253342684) received a runner shutdown signal. The [Runner shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124253341271) failed the unchanged Antigravity authentication success assertion. All 11 cases in that file passed when run directly. That Runner lane does not use the changed selector/cache path. The exact assertion-failure cause remains unverified. The chat shard passed on the one retry. The authentication assertion also passed on retry, but the same Runner shard failed a different unchanged test: `native-distribution-integrity.test.ts:242`, "retains spawned native bytes until the exact child exits", exceeded 5000ms. The [retry log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124259174201) preserves the failure. The Runner shard and required verify aggregate are still red; all other checks passed. All 33 native-distribution tests then passed in a direct local run. This shows recovery in isolation, not the cause of the Linux timeout. No further blind reruns were issued. - Replayed 15 real recent PR merge commits through a blob-filtered bare fetch. Nine needed a corrected base. The four API comparisons that returned 300 filenames became complete diffs of 3, 57, 66 and 54 files. The 3-file case (#18326) becomes eligible for graph selection. Most other samples still correctly use full CI because they include inputs outside this narrow prose policy. - Cache proof: prose edits preserve a product-test cache hit; changing runtime API documentation invalidates it. ## Risks - Prose exceptions must be removed or revised if product code starts reading those files. The allowlist is deliberately small. Runtime docs and skills remain covered. - A network or Git failure keeps the full-suite fallback. Unexpected merge topology also keeps full CI. Stack and force-full policies remain in place. - This does not claim an end-to-end speedup yet. Many mixed-content PRs still require full CI. The routing fetch reads only shallow commit/tree objects; it does not check out or execute PR files. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact served model ID and context-window size are not exposed to this session. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [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>	2026-10-30 14:29:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	52e846f2f3	perf(ci): select affected Vitest files before allocating test runners (#18348) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its CI must catch regressions without running unrelated work on every pull request. > - The existing task planner selects package lanes, but each selected lane still runs all its test files. > - Vitest can find related imports, but that graph misses tests that read files or launch processes. > - This pull request combines the real Vitest graph with conservative dependency checks before CI allocates test runners. > - The result runs fewer test files and can allocate fewer jobs while retaining tests with unknown dependencies. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18214. The repository and PR search found no duplicate file-selection implementation. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The general and serialized Vitest lanes in pull request CI. **Current behavior** An affected package schedules its complete test lane and its fixed shard count. **Proposed behavior** For source-only diffs, select related tests plus conservative filesystem, process, network and opaque consumers. Repartition those files within their existing lane owners. Keep the complete original plan when selection cannot be trusted. **Reason and benefit** Avoid unrelated test execution and allocate fewer runners when the selected workload fits fewer existing job budgets. Report file counts and job counts separately. **Breaking changes** No product or API changes. The set of PR test files and jobs changes for eligible diffs. Full CI and the kill switch retain the original coverage. ## What Changed - Add a separate selection job on the gate-approved test fleet. The metadata gate does not load PR code. - Inspect real Vitest/Vite dependency edges. Retain opaque consumers and unchanged downstream projects. Respect only complete local mock factories. Reject unknown setup dependencies and source mutations during dependency setup. - Declare `oxc-parser` directly for AST inspection. This exact version is already a transitive dependency in the checked-in lockfile; the direct declaration avoids relying on pnpm's internal dependency layout. - Produce a merge-SHA-bound manifest with exact lane ownership and duration-aware partitions. Preserve serialized execution, chat shards and native Runner ownership. - Execute exact Vitest test specifications. Positional substring filters cannot accidentally run a similarly named file from another shard. - Use the original matrix if selection fails or times out. Fail selected jobs if their published artifact is missing or invalid. - Save the uploaded artifact ID in the executable plan. Failed-job retries reuse that artifact even when GitHub increments the attempt number. - Hash selected assignments into Turbo cache inputs. A subset cannot satisfy a full run or another subset. - Add graph, workflow, real-runner and real-Turbo qualification. The regression fixture proves a filesystem contract fails even when raw Vitest selection misses it. - Document selection limits, audit artifacts and `CI_VITEST_SELECTION=off`. ## Verification - All 138 affected routing, sharding, workflow, manifest, real Vitest and real Turbo checks passed under Node 24 on the final implementation. Additional release workflow checks passed. Cases cover opaque setup, remocking, generated inputs, Node's builtin loader, artifact retries, and exact execution of similarly named files. - Repository-wide `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed before the clean rebase onto current master. The full remote typecheck and build are required on the current head. - `actionlint` passed for both changed workflows. `git diff --check` passed. - The Linux qualification run passed and selected 699 of 911 workspace test files for an Inbox change. UI graph construction took 16.1 seconds. This still uses two jobs. Synthetic partition coverage proves a 15-of-120 selection uses two of twelve jobs without dropping or duplicating files. - Both selected workspace shards passed locally. After tightening execution to exact specifications, the real colliding UI test ran as exactly one file with two passing assertions; the real server auth middleware test ran as exactly one file with 28 passing assertions. - The server probe selected 1,158 of 1,260 general files and 161 of 163 serialized files for an auth middleware change. Those conservative selections retain 12 general and nine serialized jobs. The server's temporary-home setup exception is pinned to reviewed content hashes; changed setup fails closed. - Full `pnpm test:run` has not been run locally. The full PR test matrix is required because this change modifies global CI inputs. Final-head CI is pending at runner allocation, and both qualification jobs are queued. Other recent repository workflows are also queued. Superseded runs of this PR were cancelled; this PR remains in draft until the required checks execute. - Greptile reviewed final commit `31b484fc5b412da245cffb52a8ac8977228c5651` at 5/5 with no unresolved findings. The earlier qualification run passed; it does not replace checks on the final commit. ## Risks - Dependency analysis adds setup and graph time. Fewer files do not guarantee a shorter critical path. CI summaries expose the actual file and job counts. - Static dependency graphs cannot describe all runtime inputs. Unknown inputs retain tests or use the original plan. The pure-package allowlist requires conservative review. - The trusted workflow runs from master. This PR exercises the new selector in the qualification workflow; ordinary PR selection starts after merge. Set `CI_VITEST_SELECTION=off`, use `full-ci`, or select full/shadow mode to disable narrowing. - The lockfile remains managed by the existing repository actions and is not changed here. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository tools and code execution. The exact serving 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 - [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>	2026-10-30 13:16:29 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f5dcc505c0	perf(ci): select affected suites and cache task results (#18214) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Pull request CI checks the server, UI, packages, Runner, and release paths. > - An ordinary PR starts 48 jobs even when its diff affects only a small part of the repository. > - Repeated pushes also repeat successful tests with unchanged inputs. > - This PR selects affected suites before runner allocation and caches deterministic task results with Turbo. > - Required checks validate the plan. Unknown inputs and failed comparisons keep full verification. > - The benefit is fewer runner jobs and less repeated work, with full post-merge verification retained. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The GitHub Actions PR workflow repeats unrelated suites for each push. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting CI routing, test execution, and required-check aggregation. **Current behavior** An ordinary UI component change starts the complete 48-job PR workflow. Existing dependency and compiler caches do not reuse successful test results. **Proposed behavior** A trusted planner reads the tested merge diff and task inputs. A UI component change such as `ui/src/components/Sidebar.tsx` selects 18 jobs, including build and browser coverage. Successful general, serialized, and standalone Rust tasks can reuse unchanged results across pushes in the same PR. **Reason and benefit** Reduce unrelated jobs and repeated test execution. The 48-to-18 comparison measures planned job count. Remote wall-clock savings have not yet been measured. **Breaking changes** No application API changes. Required `verify` and `e2e` names remain stable. `verify` also checks serialized suites and the canary dry run. ## What Changed - Added explicit task inputs and a pinned Turbo version. An execution adapter calls existing package scripts without adding script aliases. - Added trusted diff planning and dynamic matrices with complete fallback matrices. - Added PR-scoped task result caches. External-state and revision-stamped checks remain uncached. - Added and created the `full-ci` override label, plus repository modes `enabled`, `shadow`, and `full`. Forced and shadow runs bypass result caches. - Added candidate-workflow qualification, planner and aggregate tests, and a real Turbo cache fixture. - Kept the repository-wide CLI guidance guard in the uncached typecheck lane so UI-only diffs retain this security check. - Documented rollout controls, input maintenance, and local inspection commands. ## Verification - Passed 537 focused CI policy, routing, matrix, cache, and shard tests, plus 146 existing release workflow tests. - Passed actionlint for all four changed or added workflows and `git diff --check`. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` on the implementation base. - Checked real repository task plans for existing general-test and native Rust commands. A real server partition passed, then restored from cache: Turbo task time was 20.022 seconds for execution and 151 ms for the cache hit, excluding wrapper/setup overhead. - The real Turbo fixture exercises the execution adapter and proves source, argument, toolchain-scope, and environment invalidation, result restoration, and retry of failed tasks. - Stopped the serial local `pnpm test:run` after over 30 minutes in favor of the complete parallel GitHub suite. A local parallel database-lane attempt had PostgreSQL startup errors and timeouts. The direct migration fixture passed, then all 273 database tests passed with one local worker. This recovery does not establish the exact cause of the earlier startup failures. The full GitHub PR suite and candidate qualification passed on commit `0bf07ae071c9fe7903edc604d44b5a175727fed0`. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - All 40 CLI guidance safety tests passed with the exact uncached workflow command. - Verified that master rulesets require only `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; both names remain unchanged. - Trusted workflows load from master. The added GitHub-hosted qualification workflow exercises this candidate planner before merge. ## Risks - Changes to global inputs, including task definitions and execution helpers, force execution and disable cache restore/save for the full PR diff. Missing a cross-package filesystem read could omit a suite. Inputs include known server reads of UI files and shared tests of UI assets. Unknown paths, malformed or truncated diffs, and definition download failures select all suites. - Task result reuse requires complete inputs. Keys include Git source files, scripts, resolved dependencies, environment, toolchain, checkout path, and unclassified source files. Generated build artifacts are excluded from input hashes. Registry smoke, browser, and revision-stamped tasks remain uncached. - Maintainers must update task inputs when suites start reading new paths. `shadow` reports selection while running all work. `full` and `full-ci` disable selection and result reuse. - The implementation becomes active after merge. Full post-merge verification remains unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The session does not expose a verifiable exact runtime 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 - [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>	2026-10-29 16:56:28 -05:00