3 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	59a70dc9e2	fix(workspaces): expire reproducible Git files and restore exact commits (#16457) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and their task workspaces. > - Isolated Git worktrees and private repository copies remain on the host after tasks finish. > - These files can fill the disk even when every commit is available upstream. > - Cleanup must retain unique files, local Git state, live work, and recovery data. > - This pull request records and verifies an exact-commit restoration recipe before expiration. > - Normal reopening restores that commit even after upstream advances. > - The benefit is lower host disk use while finished tasks remain available for later work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10285 and #2022. Follows #16433 for skill-cache expiration. Related #11936 provides separate host-local cleanup tooling; this change extends the existing company-scoped lifecycle worker and normal workspace reopening. ROADMAP.md does not specify a competing implementation. ## What Changed - Add opt-in expiration for verified Paperclip-owned Git worktrees after their whole task tree has been done or cancelled for 24 hours. - Preserve active and scheduled runs, previews, pending reopening, unresolved recovery, dirty files, unknown ignored files, and unsupported or unique Git state. - Verify an authenticated fetch in a fresh object store. Save repository identity, exact commit, branch, and ownership before any deletion. - Rename eligible files into recorded managed trash. Resume interrupted cleanup under source and lifecycle locks. - Expire private base clones only after consumer, file, reference, reflog, and object checks pass. Preserve shared project base clones. - Rebuild missing bases and worktrees through normal reopening at the recorded commit. Return an explicit retryable error when repository access fails. - Add independent workspace/base switches, dry-run reports, reclaimed-byte counts, and operational documentation. No table, public API, UI, or recovery-retention change. ## Verification - Real local bare remote plus Postgres: create at A, advance upstream to B, expire the worktree and private base, reopen at A, then make and retain a subsequent commit. - Final lifecycle suite: all 20 tests passed in 46.41 seconds at `d72947a2e45be5d0c912debb03c46b15863b4798`. Review fixes cover second-cycle expiration, newer-branch recovery, normal preparation after restoration, branch adoption, and Git administration path controls. Eleven existing branch reconciliation controls also passed. Covers unique files and Git state, live descendants, scheduled runs, recovery, previews, unauthorized access, upstream failure, concurrent reopening, interrupted deletion, shared bases, and nested private worktrees. - Final guard regressions: 3 affected tests passed. Existing workspace/runtime/preparation/source controls: 328 tests passed in 238.69 seconds. - Full repository typecheck and build passed locally. The full local test attempt did not pass: initial native-session cases hit macOS Postgres shared-memory exhaustion, source changes invalidated two discovery cases, and the checkout disappeared near the end. The final-code retry of the remaining skill and unrelated controls passed all 103 tests. All checks passed on this exact head, including typecheck, general and serialized tests, Runner checks, build, canary dry-run, browser E2E, and security scans. Greptile reviewed the head at 5/5 with all findings resolved. - Fixed a blocking CI policy false positive for `docker-compose-secrets.test.mjs`. The test still rejects GitHub secret expressions, including dot, bracket, and multiline forms. Its full 15-test suite passes. - Map validation and `git diff --check` passed. - Staging dry-run inspection, measured reclamation, and ordinary product acceptance remain pending. No live acceptance is claimed. ## Risks - Git restoration depends on continued upstream availability and credentials. Cleanup skips unverified commits; restoration never substitutes the default branch. - File deletion requires multiple conservative proofs. Unknown or unsupported state is retained and can limit reclamation. - Source and lifecycle locks serialize preparation, reopening, and expiration. Remote verification has a deadline but can delay work on the same source. - Start with both expiration switches disabled. When enabled, dry-run remains the default. Rollback disables further deletion while retaining restoration support. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The exact backend model 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 (focused tests; full local limitation 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>	2026-10-15 13:09:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	25b16e65fc	fix(observability): detail workspace and connector preparation (#16454) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server prepares a repository, sandbox workspace, and connector access before an agent can reply. > - Existing traces measure large preparation phases but leave important work inside those phases unclear. > - Repository source materialization and Browser Use discovery can do more work than their callers suggest. > - New detail must preserve access checks, run ownership, and the existing work order. > - This pull request adds fixed OpenTelemetry spans inside those operations. > - Operators can use one deployed trace to select the next performance fix. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16419, #16425, #16428. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Startup traces for server workspace preparation, native sandbox synchronization, and connector assignment resolution. **Current behavior** Workspace and connector aggregate spans can take many seconds. The trace does not separate private source cloning, seed reuse, archive work, progress persistence, or each connector resolver. Browser Use resource selection builds the full authorized tool catalog. The configuration and native backend can each resolve connector assignments. **Proposed behavior** Show the awaited work as fixed child spans. Separate discovery queue wait from catalog construction. Preserve the initiating run context when another run releases a scheduler slot. Add no new lifecycle event writes for workspace detail callbacks. **Reason and benefit** Operators need evidence about the hosted critical path before another performance change. These spans distinguish filesystem work, provider transfer, authorization, transaction entry, locks, and reporting overhead. **Breaking changes** None. Authorization, query order, transaction ownership, synchronization, existing progress events, and task results retain their contracts. The change adds opt-in Observability spans under the existing OTLP endpoint gate. ## What Changed - Trace private source directory setup, Git credentials, clone, requested ref, source identity, and checkout publication. - Trace sandbox source capture, seed cache/replay, shallow clone and archive, overlay copy/archive, verification, upload, warm stamps, and descriptor persistence. - Separate existing awaited progress reporting from useful workspace work. Keep new detail callbacks trace-only. - Trace each connector resolver and Browser Use catalog/grant work. Split discovery queueing, descriptor sources, and policy evaluation. - Trace Slack authority, credential reads, catalog synchronization, transaction entry/settlement, and advisory locks. - Update the real filesystem staging trace expectations and the Honeycomb investigation guide. - Add a real scheduler regression for a queued job released by another run. Assert run ownership, parent spans, and exactly one completed queue span. ## Verification - Passed: server and adapter-utils TypeScript checks (`pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsc --noEmit` and `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec tsc --noEmit`). - Passed: 252 checks across 9 focused files. These cover real filesystem staging, native workspace synchronization, trace ownership, endpoint gating, and workspace preparation. - Passed after review: 26 trace-context, tracing-failure, and discovery-scheduler checks across 3 files (these overlap the first run). The new queued-discovery regression fails when context binding is removed and passes after restoration. An initial submillisecond timestamp assertion was replaced with explicit span-completion order to avoid SDK clock precision assumptions. - Passed on implementation commit `0e68968a4bd61001893d833f281f12bb110edbe1`: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. The later commit updates only an engine test expectation. - The first CI workspace lane found an old engine trace-tree expectation. It expected the earlier span set. The updated assertion now checks the new detail spans, their parents, and single completion. Its targeted executor check passes. - The full test suite, build, release registry, and end-to-end gates pass in CI on final head `40e37d89ef679109d60a96bb5731a0616efeaa43`: 55 passing checks and 2 optional Storybook skips. The full suite was not duplicated locally after the focused run. - Greptile reviewed the final head at 5/5. No unresolved review threads remain. - After deployment, filter Honeycomb by the hashed run ID and verify `service.version`. Inspect `heartbeat.prepare.workspace`, `runtime_selection.workspace_sync`, and the connector assignment parents. The guide in `doc/observability.md` explains each new family and the nested intervals. - No hosted run has used this new instrumentation yet. Local checks cannot establish hosted latency improvement. ## Risks - Tracing adds spans when an operator configures an OTLP endpoint. Detail remains capped at 16 spans per phase per execution attempt. - Parent and child durations overlap. The documentation explains how to avoid counting them twice. - A discovery job can start in another run's scheduler continuation. The bound callback preserves the initiating async context. - New spans export fixed names and the existing hashed run ID. They add no paths, repository URLs, connector resource IDs, credentials, tool schemas, or exception text. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact served model 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>	2026-10-15 12:21:32 -05:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip	c7f4b74111	fix: isolate fresh task sources from restricted project workspaces (#16095) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Each task must have an isolated workspace that its agent can read. > - Older project checkouts can contain worktrees for restricted tasks. > - The source access check correctly rejects these shared checkouts. > - A fresh task then fails even when its agent can clone the project remote. > - This pull request gives fresh default tasks a separate clone of the same remote. > - The task can start while the restricted task files remain protected. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Fresh tasks fail with `Task workspace access is no longer available` when their default project checkout contains a restricted task worktree. The caller has access to the new task and its remote repository. The shared local Git source is unsafe to copy. **Expected behavior** Use a separate clone of the same authorized remote for a fresh default task. Keep source access checks and responsible-user Git credentials in force. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Put a restricted task worktree inside a project checkout. 2. Assign a new default task to an agent that cannot read the restricted task. 3. Start the new task. The current source check fails before workspace creation. 4. With this fix, the task uses a separate remote source. The restricted files are absent. Later runs reuse the same owned source. Related work: Refs #15749, Refs #15528. This change keeps their source retention and workspace ownership checks. ## What Changed - Add a remote source path scoped to the company and task. - Clone through the run’s Git connection after the shared source fails its access check. - Reject reused workspaces, explicit selections, pinned branches, local sources, credential-bearing URLs, and symlink paths. - Check source access again before publishing the workspace. - Resolve later runs from the verified recorded source. Ignore leftover clones that the saved workspace does not own. - Record provenance for new implicit Git defaults. Read the current task binding before fallback. Preserve explicit, inherited and ambiguous legacy checkout choices. - Keep the effective task strategy during startup validation of matching implicit defaults. Preserve the existing explicit-selection write check. - Add regression coverage and document the fallback. ## Verification - Merged master `c8efdbfba43` and resolved both rounds of catalog/index conflicts. All upstream suites, classifications, source references and story IDs are preserved. Both fix branches combine cleanly in either merge order, with no catalog fingerprint drift. - Passed locally: 313 focused source-isolation, preparation, task-creation, binding and trust tests before the final startup fix. The final fix passes all 100 source-trust, task-binding and environment-selection tests. Earlier workspace-resolution and persisted-source suites also passed. - Real-Git regressions cover all three review findings. Reconstruction ignores an unrecorded clone and preserves unpublished commits/files. Explicit and parent-inherited checkout IDs without typed selections retain their denial and branch tips without cloning or acquiring an environment. A protected-project heartbeat completes and resumes using the task’s Git strategy with read access. Explicit selection still requires writes, and a mismatched default is rejected. - Passed: the complete Storybook catalog check with no drift errors, feature and agent map structure checks, and all 17 catalog/index script tests. The generated index counts match the merged catalog. The current upstream verification-route inventory remains unchanged. The catalog contains all 262 authored suites and 2,481 story IDs. - Passed: full workspace typecheck and build after the final guard changes, on latest head `79d2adadcb6d3d7a04b9943a91bdb8b0b6abea6d`. - Latest head `79d2adadcb6d3d7a04b9943a91bdb8b0b6abea6d`: complete CI passed (54 successful checks, two intentional skips), including the full general/serialized suites and all eight browser shards. Fresh Greptile Apex review is 5/5 on this same commit, with no unresolved findings or recommendations. The full local test command was attempted earlier without a complete aggregate result; the complete suite result is from CI. - Manual check: configure a shared project checkout with a restricted task worktree. Admit a fresh default task using the authorized remote. Confirm separate Git storage and no restricted local branch or file. Reuse, close and reopen the task workspace. Confirm that explicit, literal branch and low-trust selections retain the denied source. ## Risks - A clean remote clone excludes unpublished local work. The fallback applies only to fresh default tasks and rejects existing workspace or branch selections. - A private remote can fail to clone when the responsible user lacks Git credentials. The run then reports the failure; access checks are not bypassed. - Older untyped checkout bindings cannot prove default provenance. They keep the source denial instead of silently dropping unpublished work. - New implicit Git defaults use the existing workspace-intent contract. The source directory uses existing instance storage. No schema migration is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, model ID `gpt-6`, through Codex. Used reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, terminal tools, and test execution. The API session does not expose an exact 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>	2026-10-13 12:31:40 -07:00