mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 14:19:00 +01:00
46bf913fb95d53e2eb4ec9af6028ca4237d98dd9
9
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 scotttong
|
f5fb8ada3b | Restore chat contacts, agent pins, and scrollable recent navigation (#19685) | ||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
d807887534 |
fix(ui): use one status glyph mapping for every task view (#19329)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Task status is the main signal on every task surface: sidebar rows, the task header, the status menu, lists, the inbox, pills and chat cards. > - One task state rendered different status icons in different views. A blocked task that waits on an active sub-task showed the blue "in queue" glyph in the task header. The status menu, the chat chip and the sidebar rows showed the red "Blocked" glyph for the same task. > - The cause: each view passed its own subset of the presentation fields to `StatusIcon`. Many views dropped `blockerAttention` and some dropped `externalConversationState`. The status menu rendered its current row from the bare status. The summaries API did not return `blockerAttention`, so the recent-task sidebar could not know the state. > - This pull request puts the state-to-glyph/label mapping in one resolver and makes every task view pass all of its fields. > - The benefit is that the same state uses the same icon and label everywhere. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue. Found in a hands-on onboarding test on a staging cloud workspace. **What happened?** The sidebar and the task pane/status menu showed different status icons for the same state. On the test task (blocked, waiting on an active sub-task), the task header and the status button showed the blue "in queue" glyph. The selected "Blocked" row in the status menu showed the red blocked glyph. The coordinator sidebar "Recents" and project rows also showed the red blocked glyph, and the chat "Subtask created" chip showed a red "Blocked" chip. **Expected behavior** The same underlying state uses the same icon and label everywhere. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a task with a sub-task. Block the parent on the sub-task, and let the sub-task's agent run (the parent is "blocked, covered"). 2. Open the parent task. The header shows the blue "in queue" glyph. 3. Open the status menu. The current "Blocked" row shows the red glyph. 4. With the coordinator sidebar on, look at the task in Recents or in its expanded project. It shows the red glyph. **Paperclip version or commit** `master` at |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
40b8075916 |
feat(ui): show scheduled task waits as Monitoring (#18624)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Task indicators tell an operator whether work is active, waiting, or
complete.
> - An agent can yield until a saved monitor checks CI or another
external result.
> - The task currently keeps the In Progress icon between those runs.
> - Changing the stored status would affect monitor admission and
recovery.
> - This pull request adds a read-only Monitoring display state with a
blue clock.
> - Operators can see and filter scheduled waits while execution keeps
its existing rules.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Task status indicators, task collection filters, board columns, and
search facets.
**Current behavior**
A task that waits for a scheduled monitor shows the same In Progress
icon as active work.
**Proposed behavior**
Show Monitoring with a static blue clock when an agent-owned task has a
saved ordinary monitor and no active run, execution lock, review
participant, or active recovery action. Return to the normal task
indicator when the check starts. Preserve review, blocked, terminal, and
quota-recovery states.
**Reason and benefit**
Operators can distinguish scheduled waits from current agent work
without reading the task history.
**Breaking changes**
None to stored task statuses or execution rules. Task reads gain
optional displayStatus. Collections and search gain a separate read
filter. Existing status filters keep their lifecycle meaning.
Related historical work: #4396 covered a monitoring label exemption.
This change uses the saved monitor and a read projection.
## What Changed
- Add one SQL projection for task detail, compact lists, summaries,
relations, search results, and display-status counts.
- Show the blue clock in shared task icons and chips, task detail and
breadcrumbs, properties, references, list rows, recent navigation, and
agent task cards.
- Add Monitoring to task filtering, grouping, sorting, board columns,
and search facets. Prevent a drag from creating this derived state.
- Keep stored lifecycle statuses, monitor scheduling, checkout,
recovery, permissions, and agent status filters unchanged.
- Add database and UI regression coverage, full-page Storybook examples,
and product and access-map documentation.
## Verification
- Passed `pnpm -r typecheck`.
- Passed `pnpm build`.
- Passed `pnpm check:token-gates` and the map/catalog structural checks.
- Ran the new database suite on a disposable PostgreSQL 17 database. It
covers read surfaces, filter pagination/counts, queued/running checks,
rescheduling, completion, retained monitors, review, and recovery holds.
- Ran existing search, list, board, sidebar, task status, and filter
tests. Corrected board queries use displayStatus and eight columns.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` stopped in a chat integration shard: 12
failures (four timeouts and eight FIFO publication assertions). That run
spanned a rebase. A focused rerun on the current source passed all 21
selected cases without assertion or timeout changes. The original cause
is not established; this does not claim the full local suite passed.
Final-head required CI passed (ci / verify and ci / e2e, run
41488267209).
- Passed 82 tests for task API summaries, recovery precedence, search,
and optimistic updates; 54 tests for status cards, database reads, and
board moves; and 27 tests for blocker relations and recent-task cache
updates. One intermediate database setup hit its 20-second hook timeout;
the serial rerun passed.
- Greptile is 5/5 on
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
3e5a9f5afe |
perf(ui): load recent tasks with bounded summaries (#16851)
Replace passive recent-task detail reads with bounded, authorized summaries. Keep account isolation, stored history, task actions, and live recovery behavior. Overlap access checks with shell settings and avoid duplicate session and health reads on the first healthy socket opening. Retain domain reconciliation. Add focused coverage and local performance evidence. Isolate the existing cache capacity test from entry expiry on slow CI runners. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
8725d6ce09 |
fix: make answered Slack conversations idle (#13809)
Settle published, successful Slack turns as Idle; resume the same conversation on an admitted message. Preserve unfinished work, delivery errors, and explicit dispositions. Verified through focused lifecycle/API/UI tests, full CI, and a real staging Slack conversation in the embedded browser. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d351e08dee |
fix(ui): stop Recent Tasks storage feedback across tabs (#13402)
Version recent-task snapshots separately from activity, reject stale cache updates, and publish only on query or membership changes. Migrate history into an isolated storage namespace while preserving restart retries. Add regression coverage for conflicting caches, migration, comments, unchanged writes, and storage implementations on Node 24 and Node 26. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
ab15aff390 |
feat: add experimental persistent agent chat (#13284)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Conversations must use the same tasks, controls, and execution history. > - Users need an ongoing chat with an agent without managing task properties. > - Agents should clarify and plan work, then hand execution to assigned project tasks. > - This pull request combines the reviewed Agent Chat stack for one squash merge. > - The benefit is persistent conversation with normal task governance and shared UI. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Task lifecycle, agent runtime tools, shared task UI, and browser/paid runner tests. **Problem or motivation** Users need one persistent conversation with each agent. A separate chat store or renderer would duplicate task behavior and bypass existing controls. **Proposed solution** Use a task-backed chat per company, user, and agent. Reuse the task composer and transcript. Clarify and plan in chat, then create assigned project tasks with the relevant plan. Keep Agent Chat behind its own disabled-by-default experimental setting. **Roadmap alignment** This implements the task-backed direction in [CEO Chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#-ceo-chat). Related proposals: #2504 and #9693. Related request: #7981. The maintainer requested one squash merge of the complete stack. Consolidates the reviewed runtime [#13281](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13281), backend [#13282](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13282), and UI [#13283](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13283) layers with this PR's E2E coverage. All four layers passed CI and received Greptile 5/5 before consolidation. This PR targets master and includes the complete feature. ## What Changed - Add personal canonical chat tasks with ordinary company visibility, immutable identity, idempotent first sends, and an idle waiting state. - Process `/new` in queue order. Preserve history, release a chat pause, and fence old provider context and delayed writes. - Keep chat lifecycle rules across recovery, finalization, assignment, task lists, and rollups. - Support research and plan revision in chat. Hand plans to ordinary assigned project tasks before execution starts. Reject new chat subtasks. - Add repository-aware project creation and discovery tools, including multiple repository IDs and GitHub URLs, authorization, idempotency, and durable project-created cards. - Reuse task UI components for chat, with starred/recent agent navigation and a separate `enableAgentChat` experimental flag. - Add deterministic browser tests and 24 paid chat cells across four Codex/Claude profiles, with validated reports and screenshots. - Integrate current master recovery, controller lease, queued-message, and task UI changes. Gate chat interruption and deferred promotion on ownership/feature policy. Guarantee lease renewal and active controls are stopped even if teardown fails. - Preserve master's migration 0273 and generate chat migration 0274 with idempotent replay for development databases. ## Verification - Prior exact heads of all four PRs passed Linux CI, including build, typecheck, general/serialized tests, and browser E2E. Each had Greptile 5/5 and no unresolved findings. - Integrated local verification passed: full repository typecheck and production build, Storybook build, token gates, 340 focused UI tests, all 20 deterministic chat browser tests, two migration replay tests, 88 focused chat/queue/native/controller tests, and provider/session regressions including real lease expiry. These include the three lifecycle regressions for the final admission/teardown fixes; server typecheck also passes. Current head `1268eda16cc2af892055917e7292f068820be135` has Greptile 5/5 with no unresolved findings and passing security scans. All final-head CI gates passed: build, full Runner verification, typecheck/release registry, canary, all general/serialized test shards, and all browser E2E shards ([CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34696739927)). Local PostgreSQL startup contention required serialized retries; skipped fixtures do not count as passing coverage. - The earlier paid campaign passed all 24 chat cells and retained 32 screenshots: [report](https://d1p6rlowie26tp.cloudfront.net/runner-e2e/campaigns/gha-34648511170-1/index.html?report=agent-chat#suite-agent-chat). It tested `abacbdfd2f660709ec37312cdb758284c8399d04`; it is prior evidence, not a paid run of this integrated head. - Manual check: enable Agent Chat in Experimental settings, open an agent, clarify and revise a plan, then hand off to an assigned project task. Stop a reply, send `/new`, and verify fresh context with retained history. Disable the setting and verify agent shortcuts/new chat turns are blocked. ## Risks - Queue/session integration can affect retries and delayed writes. Tests cover ownership, cancellation, reset boundaries, idle recovery, and ordinary task behavior. - Migration 0274 adds conversation fields and constraints. Replay is idempotent and preserves existing development chat history. - This combines the previously reviewed stack at the maintainer's request. Agent Chat remains off by default and is separate from Conference Room. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 Astra (`gpt-6-astra`), with reasoning, code execution, browser tools, and parallel review. The exact context-window size is not exposed in this session. Codex and Claude also ran as test subjects in the linked paid campaign. ## 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
|
d8b9580531 |
fix(ui): debounce recent task ordering (#13007)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The recent tasks sidebar helps operators return to active and
completed work.
> - Task detail refreshes update the activity timestamps used to sort
that list.
> - Older responses can undo newer activity. Concurrent updates can move
rows repeatedly.
> - This pull request preserves the newest observed activity and
debounces row moves.
> - Operators can select a stable row while task text and live state
stay current.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Recent task rows can repeatedly swap positions when two tasks receive
updates. Older detail responses can also move a task below another task
after a newer comment promoted it.
**Expected behavior**
Rows remain stable during an update burst. The final activity order
appears after one second of quiet. Old responses never reduce the
recorded activity time.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Enable the streamlined UI and open multiple tasks.
2. Send alternating updates to two tasks in the recent list.
3. Observe row order while those updates arrive and while older detail
data refreshes.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Base commit:
|
||
|
scotttong
|
597fd63b61 | feat(ui): add streamlined navigation foundation (#12746) |
