Commit Graph
5 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip 92b238137b Connect and configure GitHub Copilot through Apps (#15705)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Apps and AI Connections store credentials and govern access to agent
runtimes.
> - Users need a supported saved-token connection and config values that
survive save and reopen.
> - The release must preserve saved-token access and task lifecycle
guarantees.
> - This pull request will connect Copilot through the normal Apps and
AI Connections path.
> - The benefit is a reviewable part of the Copilot production release.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #15701 and #15703. Supersedes setup work in #15562. Base: #15703.
Next: #15706.

## What Changed

- Require configuration update authority before Copilot
credential-bearing model discovery; default to the saved environment and
preserve explicit selection for editors.

- Keep Copilot discovery passive during reconnect reconciliation;
refresh on explicit opening, account/environment changes and reconnect.

- Add GitHub AI token connections with encrypted storage, ownership,
grants and audit logging.
- Keep repository access separate from Copilot runtime authentication.
- Probe the selected environment without sending a model prompt and
preserve authenticated model selection through save/reopen.
- Keep fresh execution admission consistent with normal Copilot setup;
persist task model choices without changing provider or permission
policy.
- Refresh authenticated models after reconnecting the same saved Copilot
account, including recovery from a previous authentication error.
- Apply the additive provider-default constraint migration through the
normal generated migration workflow.

## Verification

Runtime #15701 is merged at `d855e550ad8d2a267312983f26457aabf5393c3a`.
History #15703 is merged at `df80616d98119cbf5abd40549794d9980a5fabf6`.
Remaining source
[`42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/commit/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d)
contains the four-file authorization repair. The remaining PR trees
preserve six nonoverlapping files from the newer public mainline
managed-settings fix and the CI-owned lockfile. No unrelated provider is
enabled.

The security finding is repaired: existing-agent discovery requires
`agent_config:update` before connection selection or token resolution.
The saved environment is the default. Authorized editors can select a
prospective environment. Both denied board-viewer and agent-reader
regressions fail on the original source. All49 route tests and server
typecheck pass with the fix. Denied requests perform no connection
selection, credential resolution or probe. Current-head security scans
pass on both remaining PRs; the repaired thread is resolved.

Copilot CLI1.0.88 and profile47 retain digest
`sha256:55044aa235e88b3fe36ec8a556ee1e3382590870aab907e4462ef7d64af49cea`.
The [qualification
record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/42bcbd61299655f7e37aabe6bb5f19bba770ad1d/doc/plans/2026-10-20-copilot-qualification-v47.json)
reports20/20 Product cells,154 assertions and7/7 protocol cases,46
assertions against frozen normal installed source
`c2616370800f5f6df45246b0890ba35a7cd2faab`. The exact qualification
model is `gpt-5.6-luna`. Every passing Product case confirms cleanup.
Original failures remain recorded; automatic behavior retries are
disabled. The route-only authorization repair changes no bound
runtime/profile bytes and does not relabel the frozen campaign.

The ordinary installed remote journey passed saved-token selection,
model discovery, normal UI save/reopen, metadata-only Test, completed
task, accepted receipt and exact19-byte browser download. An open model
catalog caused no additional discovery requests during117seconds. Actual
installed runtime smokes passed on macOS ARM64, macOS x64 under Rosetta
and native Linux x64 on Daytona. Raw token browser entry was not
exercised; encrypted connection creation used the normal API.

The first Daytona file attempt timed out during delayed semantic
dispatch; its precise stalled layer remains unresolved. Independent
ordinary remote delivery and the other19 Product cells passed before one
instrumented recheck passed8/8 with unchanged source,prompt,assertions
and deadlines. No causal latency repair is claimed.

Before the authorization repair, all four final PR heads passed required
verify/E2E and fresh Greptile5/5 reviews with zero unresolved threads.
Current-head CI/review is running for the two repaired heads. Local
focused checks retain129 connection,59 runner,72 shared-eval and88
recovery/workspace passes, plus migration safety and token gates. The
additive Copilot migration is361; released master history is preserved.

[Cloud normal-package
run39414239704](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39414239704)
builds the pre-security source4f3f. All four native producers and Linux
package assembly pass; the final clean installed consumers are
finishing. All18 retained archives match their hashes;37,863 regular
files contain zero selected credentials. That package does not contain
the later route repair. The actual final published package must include
it and pass the local/Daytona live canaries. The frozen Daytona image
remains published and independently verified. No separate full-image
scan is claimed. Docker builds run in the cloud.

**Remaining:** current-head CI/review, setup and qualification merges,
final publication, and ordinary local/Daytona canaries against the
actual shipped package. The user explicitly authorizes the maintainer
review override; CI remains a merge gate. No production deployment is
claimed. Provider USD remains unknown and GitHub-attributed.

## Risks

Bad credentials, missing entitlement, runtime installation and
unavailable models must remain distinct failures. A connection must not
adopt ambient credentials. The constraint migration changes accepted
provider values, with no credential-storage migration.

Current-master NewAgent fixture extraction is retained. Copilot cases
use that shared support and test both passive discovery and explicit
reconnect under the same setup lifecycle.

The onboarding retry regression shares the component suite’s
saved-connection, authenticated-model, draft, agent-list, hire and
render lifecycle fixtures. Keeping it beside the existing onboarding
failures makes adoption versus duplicate hire observable under the same
lifecycle; this is the concrete cohesion reason for the existing large
test file.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6. The exact serving model ID and context
window are not exposed in this task. Used for code changes, review and
tool-assisted verification.

## 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>
2026-10-20 07:02:22 -05:00
cafa25029c fix(native-runtime): recover unclaimed remote startup (#16349)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The native runtime preserves task execution across server restarts.
> - Remote workspace preparation can finish before the executor claims
its first provider attempt.
> - The recovery classifier required a provider checkpoint even when the
durable coordinator proved that execution had never started.
> - A deployment during this interval therefore left safe startup work
on a permanent recovery hold.
> - This pull request admits that narrow startup state to the existing
same-run bootstrap path. Existing execution and ownership checks remain
in force.
> - The original preparation yields when recovery owns the coordinator.
It cannot fail or clean up the recovered run.
> - Tasks can continue after this interruption without an operator retry
or a duplicate provider turn.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

A server deployment interrupted a prepared remote workspace before the
native executor's first claim. The coordinator had attempt zero,
controller generation zero, and no owner, process, provider event, or
checkpoint. Restart classification returned
`ambiguous_remote_recovery_evidence` and blocked the task.

**Expected behavior**

The server should recognize this durable never-claimed state and
continue the original run through normal execution admission. A prior
claim, uncertain ownership, or contradictory execution evidence must
retain the recovery hold.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Prepare a remote workspace for a native run.
2. Stop the controller before the executor commits its first claim.
3. Restart the controller and classify the running native task.
4. Observe that the old classifier blocks it because no provider
checkpoint exists.

Related: #16341 preserves remote recovery failure reasons. #16344
strengthens remote restart qualification. Neither changes admission for
an untouched remote startup.

## What Changed

- Require a server-owned fencing version written only with fresh native
identities. Older unmarked preparations stay held during rolling
upgrades; caller profile data cannot add that marker to an existing run.
- Leave the current server's active preparation with its existing
execution.
- Yield through the controller-detachment path when a different
execution owns the coordinator lease. Lease expiry does not grant
takeover authority.
- Preserve run-scoped gateway tokens during detachment so stale
preparation cannot revoke the recovered worker's tools.
- Admit a valid prepared remote workspace only when the locked
coordinator proves attempt and controller generation zero, no owner, and
no prior session or execution evidence.
- Check launch receipts and provider source events before granting
bootstrap recovery.
- Keep the original run and session. Preserve atomic recovery claims,
executor durable-state checks, and normal admission gates.
- Add real PostgreSQL regression tests for competing controllers and
seven contradictory evidence cases.
- Update recovery documentation, the run-log reason, and both capability
maps.

## Verification

- The competing-controller regressions failed before the ownership fix
and pass for both live and expired foreign leases.
- On the final revision, 77 runtime-selection, restart recovery, real
PostgreSQL, and heartbeat boundary tests pass with no skips, including
all local runner process fixtures. The full native executor file passes
all 698 tests.
- Another 91 live-run route tests pass locally. An earlier CI timeout in
that unrelated file passed on retry; the complete final-head CI passed
without that failure.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and
`git diff --check`: passed locally. The map check verifies structure
only.
- Local `pnpm test:run` did not finish: an early attempt had
build-related collection failures, and later full-suite execution was
stopped after complete CI passed. Targeted suites passed after build
preparation. This is not a local full-suite pass.
- The complete [PR
workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38669996667)
passed on `2baffb3652bfeb4705a30ca3706fbda6c3d72aa4`, including all test
shards, build/typecheck, runner verification, and browser E2E. All 55
applicable review/security/CI checks succeeded; two Storybook checks
were skipped.
- [Greptile
Apex](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16349#issuecomment-6180848957):
5/5 on the same final head, with no unresolved findings.
- No live remote provider restart is claimed by the database regression.

## Risks

- A bare executor can no longer take a foreign coordinator lease after
expiry. A verified recovery claim must transfer authority first.
- Existing preparations without the server-owned fencing marker retain
their recovery hold during rolling upgrades.
- Incorrect admission could duplicate provider work. This path requires
a positive durable never-claimed receipt, rejects contradictory launch
evidence, and keeps the executor's existing durable-root verification.
- Previously claimed or incomplete remote recovery evidence remains
blocked. This change does not clear historical terminal holds.
- No schema, API, dependency, or UI changes.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code execution,
and browser inspection. The exact serving snapshot ID and context window
size 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
- [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>
Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-14 19:32:39 -07:00
DottaandPaperclip 473c80d13f Automatically import and update project repository skills (#16066)
Automatically import skills from new GitHub project repositories and update enabled sources in the background. Preserve project-derived access, saved selections, immutable execution versions and explicit pins; add legacy adoption, refresh and connection repair in Sources.

Include durable scheduling and bounded work credits, production Storybook journeys, real GitHub-to-routine acceptance receipts and final-head CI/security/Greptile qualification.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 16:11:43 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip f329b24ee1 feat: give tasks durable project-optional workspaces (#15749)
Give tasks durable company-scoped workspace bindings independent of project assignment, channel defaults and authorized repository preparation. Reuse verified input seeds and sparse output recovery while preserving trust, privacy and controller provisioning boundaries.

Full CI and E2E, Superagent, legacy checks and Greptile Apex 5/5 passed on reviewed head 753680b61c. All review findings are resolved; the PR records focused verification and historical acceptance limits.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-12 20:45:18 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip 2a2071340d refactor(server): extract heartbeat runtime selection (#15746)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Heartbeat execution prepares a runtime, dispatches work, and records
the result.
> - Earlier refactors separated workspace services, scheduling, and
completion.
> - The executor still builds native inputs and records runtime
selection inline.
> - This preparation must preserve admitted inputs and serialize with
Stop.
> - This pull request moves that phase into a typed runtime-selection
module.
> - Reviewers can inspect runtime preparation separately from dispatch
and cleanup.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #15732.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Maintainability of heartbeat runtime preparation and selection.

**Subsystem affected**

server/ — orchestration services.

**Current behavior**

The main heartbeat service has 8,128 lines. `executeRun` builds or
restores native inputs, selects sessions and sandbox lifecycle, and
records native or legacy selection inline.

**Proposed behavior**

Move this phase into
`server/src/services/heartbeat/runtime-selection.ts`. The executor calls
`selectHeartbeatRuntime` at the existing boundary and receives an
explicit selection result. The main file becomes 7,275 lines, a
reduction of 853 lines.

**Reason and benefit**

This gives runtime selection its own typed boundary and direct tests. It
preserves existing decisions, database transactions, and cleanup
ordering.

**Breaking changes**

None intended. All public heartbeat exports remain available.

## What Changed

- Move native input assembly, completion contract selection, checkpoint
lookup, runtime persistence, and native workspace-sync preparation into
`selectHeartbeatRuntime`.
- Preserve the row lock and controller lease check that serialize native
selection with cancellation.
- Report lifecycle and ownership changes to the executor immediately,
including when a later preparation step throws.
- Move sandbox lifecycle and model fallback helpers with compatible
public re-exports.
- Add 12 database-backed boundary tests. Update the existing
session-recovery source test and developer guide.

## Verification

- Structural AST comparison against current `master` confirms the
784-line selection block, moved helpers, and remaining service bodies
are unchanged after normalizing boundary callbacks. All 140 public
exports are preserved.
- On final head `2eddaa485f`, all 12 new database-backed tests and 83
existing lifecycle, selection, fallback-warning, and session regression
tests pass (95 total).
- Five executor integration cases passed before the rebase. Their
final-head rerun could not start because the local checkout was removed
during verification; no assertions ran in that last attempt.
- `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` both pass on final head.
- Local verification limitations: the full `pnpm test:run` was
attempted, then stopped after database/process startup timeouts in
concurrent local runs. Two unchanged optional real-runner session cases
timed out on the initial run and one isolated retry; they were excluded
from the 95-test focused run. CI also skips those two binary-dependent
cases.
- All CI gates pass on final head `2eddaa485f`: typecheck, build,
general and serialized tests, runner checks, E2E, and canary dry run.
- Greptile reviewed final head at 5/5 with no actionable findings.

## Risks

This boundary controls native admission and cleanup ownership. Losing an
update after a later exception could change resource cleanup. Immediate
callbacks preserve those updates. Tests cover Stop races, lost
controller leases, immutable admitted inputs, competing runtime
selection, and workspace-sync failures. The change adds no schema or API
behavior.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, code editing, and command
execution. The session does not expose the exact model variant 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 (95 focused tests on final
head; broader local limitations documented 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>
2026-10-10 07:31:15 -05:00