mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 09:37:19 +01:00
4e97daafa06a54f02027335437c4f48e50b84236
7
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
c341588bdb |
fix(ui): add Cloud invitations to the Members page (#13922)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - People manage collaborators from the Members page. > - Cloud manages invitations outside the tenant's local invitation system. > - The local Invites tab is hidden on Cloud, so this page has no way to invite a person. > - This pull request adds an Invite people action for the current Cloud stack's owner or admin. > - The action opens the existing Cloud People settings for that stack. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A Cloud owner opens Organization Settings → Members and finds no invitation action. The tenant-local Invites tab is hidden, and the page does not link to Cloud's invitation flow. **Expected behavior** Cloud owners and admins can start an invitation from Members. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Sign in to a Cloud-managed instance as the current stack's owner or admin. 2. Open Organization Settings → Members with `company.invites` hidden. 3. Look for an invitation action beside the page heading. **Paperclip version or commit** `7b7c4d4172d6aac14919e2682b702ae87bc17653`. **Deployment mode** Cloud-managed, authenticated. Related search: #2388 proposes broader member-management UI. This change only connects the existing Members page to Cloud invitations. No duplicate Cloud invitation action PR was found. ## What Changed - Add **Invite people** beside the Members heading for the current Cloud stack's owner/admin. - Read the role from the authenticated Cloud portfolio. Ownership of another stack does not enable the action. - Navigate to the current stack's People settings on the configured Cloud origin. Keep the local Invites tab hidden when configured. - Cover allowed roles, denied roles, loading, failed refresh, missing configuration, current-stack selection, and self-hosted behavior. Document the navigation contract. ## Verification - Focused Members and Cloud link tests: 23 passed. - Full UI suite: 6,669 passed across 634 files. - UI typecheck and `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed. - `pnpm build`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - All PR CI checks passed, including the full general, serialized, browser, and runner test jobs. The duplicate local repository-wide `pnpm test:run` was stopped after CI completed; it is not reported as a local pass. - Manual acceptance after tenant rollout: an owner/admin opens Members, selects **Invite people**, and reaches the same stack's Cloud People settings. A member does not see the action. ## Risks - The action needs a tenant app update before it appears on an existing stack. - The portfolio request must identify the current stack and its role. The action stays hidden when that information is unavailable or the request fails. - Cloud rechecks invitation authorization at the destination. No schema, API, or invitation-acceptance behavior changes. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, code execution, and repository tools. The session does not expose a more specific model identifier 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> |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
a4f1b3c533 |
Move company invites into a tab of the Members page (#12289)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Company settings include member management and invites, which are one workflow: invite someone, watch the join request, manage the membership > - Today invites sit on a standalone settings page, costing a sidebar entry and forcing people to bounce between two pages for one task > - Merging invites into the Members page keeps the workflow in one place without losing any capability > - This pull request turns the Members page into a Members/Invites tab bar, redirects the old URL, and keeps both operator-visibility keys meaningful > - The benefit is a tighter settings surface for every deployment, with `company.invites` now hiding just the tab while `company.members` hides the whole page ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists; describing the issue inline per the enhancement template: **What existing behavior does this improve?** Company invites live on a standalone settings page separate from the Members page, even though inviting someone and managing the resulting membership are one workflow. **Subsystem affected** Web UI (company settings) **Current behavior** `/company/settings/invites` is its own page with its own sidebar entry (gated by `company.invites`); the Members page (`company.members`) is separate. The sidebar company menu's "Invite people" shortcut links to the invites page and is not gated by the hidden-settings mechanism at all. **Proposed behavior** The Members page carries a Members/Invites tab bar, addressable via `?tab=invites`. The invite creation flow, latest-link panel, and invite history move unchanged into an `InvitesSection` component. The old URL redirects to the tab (still behind its `HiddenSettingsPageGate`). `company.members` hides the whole page; `company.invites` hides just the Invites tab, and the tab bar collapses when only Members remains. The "Invite people" shortcut points at the tab and hides when either surface is operator-hidden. **Reason and benefit** One settings surface for one workflow: fewer sidebar entries and no bouncing between two pages to invite someone and then manage the membership. Operators keep the same visibility controls, with a sharper meaning for each key. **Breaking changes** None. Bookmarks to the old invites URL redirect to the tab, invite and membership APIs are unchanged, and both hidden-settings keys keep working. ## What Changed - `ui/src/pages/CompanyInvites.tsx` → `ui/src/components/access/InvitesSection.tsx` (page chrome and breadcrumbs dropped; content unchanged), with its tests moved alongside. - `ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.tsx`: Members/Invites tabs via the shared `PageTabBar`, `?tab=invites` search param, `company.invites` gating with tab snap-back; legacy "Open Invites" button retargeted. - `ui/src/App.tsx`: the invites route becomes a gated redirect to `/company/settings/members?tab=invites`. - `CompanySettingsSidebar` / `CompanySettingsNav`: standalone Invites entry/tab removed; the old path maps to the members tab. - `ui/src/components/SidebarCompanyMenu.tsx`: "Invite people" now links to the tab and hides when `company.members` or `company.invites` is hidden (closes an existing gating gap). - Tests: moved invites tests, new tab coverage (default tab, deep link, operator-hidden tab skips the invites fetch), sidebar/nav suites updated. ## Verification - `npx vitest run ui/src/components/CompanySettingsSidebar.test.tsx ui/src/components/access/CompanySettingsNav.test.tsx ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.test.tsx ui/src/components/access/InvitesSection.test.tsx` — 24 tests passing. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — clean. ## Risks - Low. Pure UI restructure: invite APIs, membership APIs, and the hidden-settings registry keys are unchanged. Bookmarks to the old invites URL redirect (and stay gated). The `company.invites` key's meaning narrows from "hide the page" to "hide the tab", which is the same effective surface. ## Model Used Claude (Anthropic), model id `claude-fable-5`, extended thinking, agentic tool use via Claude Code. ## 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 |
||
|
scotttong
|
4d82f5eaea | copy: unify user-facing "company" wording to "organization" (#12243) | ||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e826188e82 |
refactor(settings): unify settings and speed up exports (#11789)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Operators use the settings area to control a company and its Paperclip instance. > - The current navigation separates related settings and uses duplicate instance pages. > - Company exports also do independent reads in sequence and do extra work for previews. > - Hardened workspace commands can differ from their saved command after loopback binding. > - This pull request makes these related operator workflows consistent and faster. > - The benefit is one clear settings area, faster exports, and stable runtime command matching. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #338 Related: #9834 **What existing behavior does this improve?** This improves the company settings UI, company export preparation, and workspace runtime command matching. **Current behavior** Company and instance settings use separate navigation and duplicate pages. Export preparation reads many independent records in sequence. Preview generation can also build an unused organization image. A command with a forced loopback bind can fail to match its saved runtime command. **Proposed behavior** Use one settings navigation and put general instance controls on the company General page. Load independent export data with bounded concurrency, skip unused preview image work, and load the export page only when it is needed. Treat the loopback-bound form of a command as the same runtime command. **Reason and benefit** Operators get one clear settings area. Large company exports need fewer serialized reads. Export previews and initial UI loads do less work. Hardened runtime services remain linked to their saved command definitions. **Breaking changes** The obsolete instance General URL redirects to the unified settings page. Access and Heartbeats remain available, and legacy bookmarks keep their destinations. No API response shape or database schema changes. ## What Changed - Unified company and instance settings navigation and removed duplicate instance settings pages. - Embedded general instance controls in the company General page and kept access-sensitive navigation behavior. - Preserved instance Access and Heartbeats controls in the unified navigation and normalized old bookmarks to those destinations. - Improved environment and access-state handling when workspace seed requests overlap. - Added bounded export reads, a lighter preview path, deferred export preparation, and lazy export-page loading. - Matched loopback-bound runtime commands to their saved command definitions. - Added focused shared, server, and UI regression tests. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run <18 changed test files>`: 18 files and 256 tests passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates`: passed all four token gates. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed for all workspace projects. - `pnpm build`: passed for all workspace projects. - `pnpm test:run`: tests ran without a reported failure, but the runner did not close after the server handoff tests. The process closed with status 0 after an interrupt. - Focused latest-head route tests: 2 files and 4 tests passed. - GitHub latest-head checks: all completed without failure. - Greptile: 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Medium risk: settings routes and navigation changed across several operator roles. - Medium risk: bounded export concurrency increases simultaneous database reads. The limits stay below the normal pool size. - Low risk: runtime command matching accepts only the known Tailscale HTTPS loopback transformation. - No migrations are included. > 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 with a GPT-5-family coding model. The runtime does not expose the exact deployed model ID or context-window size. Reasoning, tool use, and local code execution were enabled. ## 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) - [ ] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details Exception: This task requires the existing execution branch. The harness does not permit a branch rename. - [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
|
38c185fb8b |
[codex] Add agent permissions and controls plan (#6386)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies by keeping task ownership, approvals, and operator control inside one control plane. > - Agent permissions and plugin-hosted company settings sit on the boundary between autonomy and governance. > - V1 needs scoped task assignment rules, plugin extension points, and clearer company access surfaces without weakening company boundaries. > - The branch builds the core authorization service, plugin SDK/host APIs, and UI simplifications needed to support those controls. > - Paperclip EE plugin surfaces were intentionally moved out of this core PR per review direction, so this PR now carries only the public core/plugin infrastructure work. > - The latest updates preserve the PAP-9937 branch changes that belong in this PR, remove the `design/` artifacts, and exclude the experimental `plugin-briefs` package. > - Greptile feedback was applied through the authorization/audit paths and the final cleanup commit was re-reviewed at 5/5 with no unresolved Greptile threads. > - The benefit is safer assignment control with extension hooks for richer permission products while preserving simple defaults for normal operators. ## What Changed - Added scoped task-assignment authorization decisions and routed issue/agent assignment mutations through the authorization service. - Added plugin SDK and host APIs for company settings slots, authorization policy/grant management, assignment previews, and bridge invocation scope propagation. - Simplified core company access UI and moved advanced controls behind plugin-provided settings surfaces. - Added retry-now affordances for blocked issue next-step notices. - Added protected-assignment enforcement for persisted agent/project/issue policies, including explicit-grant fallback behavior. - Added incremental principal-access compatibility backfill for active agent memberships and role-default human permission grants. - Added the Markdown code block wrap action fix from the latest branch changes. - Removed `design/` artifacts from the PR and removed `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs` from the final diff. - Addressed Greptile feedback for plugin actor sanitization, legacy membership handling, audit pagination, unknown grant-scope metadata, and startup test mocks. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 2 files passed, 54 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/company-portability.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 62 tests passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authorization-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/plugin-access-authorization-host-services.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts` -> 3 files passed, 28 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` -> passed. - `git diff --check` -> passed. - `node ./scripts/check-docker-deps-stage.mjs` -> passed. - `CI=true pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` -> passed with no lockfile update. - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.interaction.test.tsx` -> 1 test passed. - `git ls-files design packages/plugins/plugin-briefs | wc -l` -> 0. - GitHub CI on `40cd83b53` -> all checks passed, merge state `CLEAN`. - Greptile on `40cd83b53` -> 5/5, 102 files reviewed, 0 comments/annotations added, 0 unresolved review threads. - Confirmed the PR diff contains no `design/`, `packages/plugins/plugin-briefs`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, or `.github/workflows` changes. ## Risks - Medium: task assignment authorization paths are behaviorally stricter for protected/private policy data, so existing plugin-authored policies may block assignment until explicit grants or approval flows are configured. - Medium: plugin-host authorization APIs expand the surface area available to trusted plugins and need careful review for company scoping. - Low: startup now performs a principal-access compatibility backfill, but the migration and runtime backfill use conflict-tolerant inserts. > 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 coding agent, tool-enabled workflow with shell, git, and GitHub CLI access. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
d8b63a18e7 |
[codex] Add access cleanup and user profile page (#4088)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is moving from a solo local operator model toward teams supervising AI-agent companies. > - Human access management and human-visible profile surfaces are part of that multiple-user path. > - The branch included related access cleanup, archived-member removal, permission protection, and a user profile page. > - These changes share company membership, user attribution, and access-service behavior. > - This pull request groups those human access/profile changes into one standalone branch. > - The benefit is safer member removal behavior and a first profile surface for user work, activity, and cost attribution. ## What Changed - Added archived company member removal support across shared contracts, server routes/services, and UI. - Protected company member removal with stricter permission checks and tests. - Added company user profile API, shared types, route wiring, client API, route, and UI page. - Simplified the user profile page visual design to a neutral typography-led layout. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/access-service.test.ts server/src/__tests__/user-profile-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.test.tsx --hookTimeout=30000` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/user-profile-routes.test.ts --testTimeout=30000 --hookTimeout=30000` after an initial local embedded-Postgres hook timeout in the combined run. - Split integration check: merged after runtime/governance and dev-infra/backups with no merge conflicts. - Confirmed this branch does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Risks - Medium risk: changes member removal permissions and adds a new user profile route with cross-table stats. - The profile page is a new UI surface and may need visual follow-up in browser QA. - No database migrations are included. > 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-5.4 tool-enabled coding model, agentic code-editing/runtime with local shell and GitHub CLI access; exact context window and reasoning mode are not exposed by the Paperclip harness. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
|
b9a80dcf22 |
feat: implement multi-user access and invite flows (#3784)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane for autonomous AI companies. > - V1 needs to stay local-first while also supporting shared, authenticated deployments. > - Human operators need real identities, company membership, invite flows, profile surfaces, and company-scoped access controls. > - Agents and operators also need the existing issue, inbox, workspace, approval, and plugin flows to keep working under those authenticated boundaries. > - This branch accumulated the multi-user implementation, follow-up QA fixes, workspace/runtime refinements, invite UX improvements, release-branch conflict resolution, and review hardening. > - This pull request consolidates that branch onto the current `master` branch as a single reviewable PR. > - The benefit is a complete multi-user implementation path with tests and docs carried forward without dropping existing branch work. ## What Changed - Added authenticated human-user access surfaces: auth/session routes, company user directory, profile settings, company access/member management, join requests, and invite management. - Added invite creation, invite landing, onboarding, logo/branding, invite grants, deduped join requests, and authenticated multi-user E2E coverage. - Tightened company-scoped and instance-admin authorization across board, plugin, adapter, access, issue, and workspace routes. - Added profile-image URL validation hardening, avatar preservation on name-only profile updates, and join-request uniqueness migration cleanup for pending human requests. - Added an atomic member role/status/grants update path so Company Access saves no longer leave partially updated permissions. - Improved issue chat, inbox, assignee identity rendering, sidebar/account/company navigation, workspace routing, and execution workspace reuse behavior for multi-user operation. - Added and updated server/UI tests covering auth, invites, membership, issue workspace inheritance, plugin authz, inbox/chat behavior, and multi-user flows. - Merged current `public-gh/master` into this branch, resolved all conflicts, and verified no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is included in this PR diff. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/issues-service.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx` - `pnpm run preflight:workspace-links && pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/plugin-routes-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime-service-authz.test.ts server/src/__tests__/access-validators.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/authz-company-access.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/sidebar-preferences-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/approval-routes-idempotency.test.ts server/src/__tests__/openclaw-invite-prompt-route.test.ts server/src/__tests__/agent-cross-tenant-authz-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/routines-e2e.test.ts` - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/auth-routes.test.ts ui/src/pages/CompanyAccess.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck && pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - `pnpm db:generate` - `npx playwright test --config tests/e2e/playwright.config.ts --list` - Confirmed branch has no uncommitted changes and is `0` commits behind `public-gh/master` before PR creation. - Confirmed no `pnpm-lock.yaml` change is staged or present in the PR diff. ## Risks - High review surface area: this PR contains the accumulated multi-user branch plus follow-up fixes, so reviewers should focus especially on company-boundary enforcement and authenticated-vs-local deployment behavior. - UI behavior changed across invites, inbox, issue chat, access settings, and sidebar navigation; no browser screenshots are included in this branch-consolidation PR. - Plugin install, upgrade, and lifecycle/config mutations now require instance-admin access, which is intentional but may change expectations for non-admin board users. - A join-request dedupe migration rejects duplicate pending human requests before creating unique indexes; deployments with unusual historical duplicates should review the migration behavior. - Company member role/status/grant saves now use a new combined endpoint; older separate endpoints remain for compatibility. - Full production build was not run locally in this heartbeat; CI should cover the full matrix. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent, GPT-5-based model, CLI/tool-use environment. Exact deployed model identifier and context window were not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Note on screenshots: this is a branch-consolidation PR for an already-developed multi-user branch, and no browser screenshots were captured during this heartbeat. --------- Co-authored-by: dotta <dotta@example.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> |