2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	d1cd9c37f4	fix(ui): keep Archive available on every inbox item (#11636) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The Mine inbox combines tasks, failed runs, approvals, and access requests > - Each item needs a consistent action that removes it from the inbox > - Task rows keep the Archive action separate from the unread marker > - Other rows used one slot for both actions, so an unread marker hid Archive > - This pull request gives every Mine inbox row the same Archive action > - The benefit is consistent hover and swipe cleanup for every inbox item type ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Unread failed runs, approvals, and join requests showed a blue unread marker but no Archive button. The user had to mark the item as read before the old leading Archive control became available. **Expected behavior** Every Mine inbox item shows Archive on hover. Every item also keeps its swipe-to-archive behavior. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open the Mine inbox. 2. Add an unread failed run, approval, or join request. 3. Hover the new item. 4. Observe that Archive is missing before this change. **Paperclip version or commit** Current `master` at `0e9b03832d`. **Deployment mode** Local development from source. **Additional context** PR #1860 improves the accessibility of the existing swipe gesture. PR #9704 changes server-side archive resurfacing rules. Neither PR adds the missing hover action to unread non-task rows. ## What Changed - Reused the task-row Archive action for failed runs, approvals, and join requests. - Kept the unread marker visible in its own leading slot. - Kept retry, approve, and reject actions beside the new trailing Archive action. - Added regression coverage for hover Archive and swipe wrappers on every non-task Mine row type. - Updated a test comment so the repository token gate does not treat documented color literals as UI source. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Inbox.test.tsx src/components/IssueRow.test.tsx src/components/SwipeToArchive.test.tsx` — 46 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` — passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm test:run` — 4,284 tests passed. Ten unrelated runtime-exposure tests cannot claim fixed ports 42000 and 52000 because host Tailscale listeners already own them. - `pnpm build` — passed. - GitHub CI on the latest head — all required checks passed. - Greptile — 5/5 confidence with no open review threads. ## Risks - Low risk. The change only affects Mine inbox row actions and regression tests. - The server archive and dismiss APIs do not change. - Retry, approve, and reject behavior does not change. - No documentation change is required because this fix restores the expected inbox behavior. > 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 based on GPT-5. The runtime did not expose a dated model ID or context-window size. Reasoning, terminal tool use, code execution, and GitHub integration 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) - [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>	2026-08-18 15:06:24 -05:00
scotttongandClaude Opus 5	a1278e6ded	fix(markdown): make rendered code blocks follow the active theme (#11591) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Agents report their work in task chat, and that chat renders markdown through `MarkdownBody` > - Agents post shell commands, API payloads and diffs, so a fenced code block is one of the most frequent things a person reads in the product > - The rendered code block was pinned to two literal colors, so it stayed dark in light mode and was the only dark surface on a light page > - The `prose` and the `prose-invert` variables held the same two values, so the theme could not change the block at all > - This pull request binds the block to the theme tokens that already exist and already carry a `.dark` override > - The benefit is that a code block now matches the page in both modes, and it follows any future change to the theme automatically ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. The problem is described below. **What happened?** A fenced code block in rendered markdown is always dark. It uses the background `#1e1e2e` and the text color `#cdd6f4` in light mode and in dark mode. In light mode the block is the only dark surface on the page. The rule is in `ui/src/index.css`. The variables `--tw-prose-pre-bg` and `--tw-prose-invert-pre-bg` are set to the same literal value, so `prose-invert` cannot change it. **Expected behavior** A code block uses a light surface with dark text in light mode. It uses a dark surface with light text in dark mode. It follows the theme like every other surface in the app. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Start the app and open a task that contains a fenced code block in its chat. 2. Set the theme to light. 3. Look at the code block. The block is dark. The page is light. 4. Set the theme to dark. The block does not change. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on `master` at `4af55ba6b`. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific (core bug). The defect is in the UI render path. **Deployment mode** Local development server. ## What Changed - Bind `.paperclip-markdown pre` to `--muted`, `--foreground`, `--border` and `--radius-lg` in `ui/src/index.css`. Remove the `#1e1e2e` and `#cdd6f4` literals. - Set the four `--tw-prose-*-pre-*` variables to the same tokens, so `prose` and `prose-invert` both follow the theme. - Apply the same four tokens to `.paperclip-mdxeditor-content pre`. - Change the fill of the copy button and the wrap button to `--background` in `ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.tsx`. The old fill was `color-mix(in oklab, var(--muted) 92%, var(--background) 8%)`. That value is almost equal to the block's new `--muted` surface, so the buttons would nearly disappear. - Update the stale comment above the rule. The comment said "Dark theme code blocks". - Add `ui/src/components/MarkdownCodeBlockStyles.test.ts`. It fails if a literal color returns to any themed code surface. - Export `codeBlockActionStyle` from `MarkdownBody.tsx` so the new test can read it. No new design token is added. Every token used here is already defined in `ui/src/index.css`, and each one already has a `.dark` override. ## Verification Automated: ```bash cd ui && npx vitest run --config vitest.config.ts src/components/MarkdownCodeBlockStyles.test.ts src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx src/components/MarkdownBody.wrap.test.tsx src/components/MarkdownAccentStyles.test.ts ``` 59 tests pass. `MarkdownCodeBlockStyles.test.ts` is new. It guards the defect directly. It reads `index.css` and asserts that each themed code surface rides a token and holds no hex, `rgb()` or `hsl()` literal. I confirmed the test fails on the original defect: restoring `#1e1e2e` and `#cdd6f4` fails 2 of the 5 tests. Manual. Open a task that has a fenced code block in its chat. Read the computed style of `.paperclip-markdown pre` in the browser. The measured values are: | Property | Light | Dark | | --- | --- | --- | | background | `oklch(0.97 0 0)` | `oklch(0.269 0 0)` | | color | `oklch(0.145 0 0)` | `oklch(0.985 0 0)` | | border | `oklch(0.922 0 0)` | `oklch(1 0 0 / 0.1)` | | radius | `8px` | `8px` | These values are `--muted`, `--foreground`, `--border` and `--radius-lg` for each mode. Toggle the theme and confirm the block changes with the page. ## Risks Low risk. The change is CSS and one inline style value. There is no migration and no schema change. Two behavioral notes for the reviewer: 1. The corner radius changes from `calc(var(--radius) - 3px)` (5px) to `var(--radius-lg)` (8px). This matches the approved design and removes an arbitrary offset. It is a small visual change on every code block. 2. The CodeMirror theme inside the MDXEditor still uses the Catppuccin literals (`ui/src/index.css`, the `.paperclip-mdxeditor .cm-editor` rules). That surface is an editor, not a rendered snippet, and a change there needs a full light CodeMirror theme. A code block therefore looks light when it is rendered and dark while a person edits it. This is intentional in this pull request. Tell me if you want it in scope. Syntax highlighting, line numbers and diff rows are not in this pull request. The repository has no highlighter dependency and no syntax or diff tokens. Those are separate changes. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5`), via Claude Code. Extended thinking was on. Tool use was on, with file edit, shell, browser automation and the Paper design tool. The design was produced first in Paper, then read back through the design tool for exact token values rather than from screenshots. ## 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 - [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 Notes on the unchecked boxes: - Branch name. The branch is `claude/paperclip-code-snippet-styling-202f7d`. It describes the change, but the `202f7d` suffix comes from the local worktree name. It carries no ticket id. I did not rename it, because the branch was already named when this work was requested. Tell me if you want it renamed before review. - CI and Greptile. Not yet run at the time of opening. --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-17 21:36:56 -07:00