mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-08 21:03:51 +02:00
5ee9e751fbb38787c055ee793c3412ecfc89da2e
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
04546c82d5 |
fix(runner): reconnect Daytona sessions after controller restart (#13691)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The native runner can execute a task inside a Daytona sandbox. > - The sandbox can keep running when the Paperclip controller restarts. > - Recovery treated sandbox process IDs as local process IDs and selected the wrong recovery path. > - Live verification also found races between startup, shutdown, and queued task cleanup. > - This pull request verifies the existing remote owner and orders those transitions. > - Users can continue the same task and provider session after a controller restart. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The Daytona `recover-controller` cases failed with `runner_state_identity_mismatch`. Remote process IDs can be absent on the controller or collide with unrelated local processes. Recovery then looked for remote state in the local runner directory. Later turns could also start before the previous executor released its sandbox resources. **Expected behavior** Reconnect to the original sandbox and authenticated runner. Preserve the task, provider session, and queued comments. Reject a replacement sandbox or mismatched identity. Do not start another provider during reattachment. **Steps to reproduce** Run the `everyday-workflows` `recover-controller` case for `runner-codex` or `runner-acpx-claude` in Daytona. The browser creates a Python tool, requests a revision, restarts the controller during execution, and queues another revision. It then downloads and tests the final ZIP. Related: #13682 is the preceding operational fix. #13291 addresses legacy sandbox conversation recovery, a different execution path. #13666 includes broader run-capacity work; this change guards cleanup of an existing native task executor. ## What Changed - Add remote runner recovery without interpreting sandbox PIDs on the controller. - Verify the original provider lease, remote workspace, durable state, process marker, and authenticated PRP authority before adoption. - Compare the process marker with live Linux boot identity and start ticks to reject PID reuse. Read virtual proc files through the guaranteed Node runtime; unavailable proof blocks adoption without blocking a fresh launch. - Make the E2E supervisor own the actual server process so forced restart cannot leave a late database closer behind. - Scope the chat delivery lease test to its own fixture instead of draining other tests’ pending deliveries. - Preserve provider-attempt counts and recorded evidence during reattachment. - Serialize an idle-session checkpoint with admission of the next native turn. - Wait for an in-progress startup to acknowledge restart detachment. Fail after a bounded deadline if it cannot. - Keep a queued comment waiting until the previous native task executor releases its resources. Allow unrelated tasks to continue. - Update the Daytona image's resolved lock digest to match current dependency manifests. - Add classifier, ownership, process, startup, checkpoint, and queued-admission regression tests. Document recovery behavior. ## Verification - 415 focused tests passed across native execution, restart recovery, workspace synchronization, queued admission, and real-process restart tests. The final Node-based fingerprint change passed all 375 native-session tests. - Runner harness unit tests: 394 passed. Chat integration shard 2: 335 passed after fixture isolation. - The exact fingerprint command succeeded twice in a disposable Daytona sandbox and returned the same identity; the sandbox was deleted. - 11 real-process restart integration tests passed, including absent and colliding remote PIDs. - Repository typecheck and final build passed. Broad local checks found machine-dependent database startup and timing failures; focused retries passed. The final-revision PR pipeline is green. One unrelated browser shard hit a five-second blank-page timeout on the first run and passed its targeted retry. - Final-revision local headed browser E2E: `everyday-workflows.runner-acpx-claude.daytona.recover-controller` passed on attempt 1 in 4.7 minutes, **40/40 checks**. Manual browser inspection confirmed Done, all three ZIPs, and delivery of the queued follow-up. All three runs succeeded using the same provider session. The harness downloaded and independently tested the final artifact. - Final-revision Daytona campaign: https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/35463999611 — **Codex passed first attempt (4.8 minutes); ACPX Claude passed first attempt (6.1 minutes)**. Campaign aggregation/publication is finishing; both test jobs succeeded. - Greptile reviewed `beb08d8493b3286f5bb988dead369ff8c96a395d`: **5/5**, no open findings. - Staging browser verification is pending selection of a disposable staging instance and removal of a Chrome extension UI block. ## Risks - Recovery now depends on the original sandbox remaining available. A replacement or mismatched identity still blocks adoption. - Shutdown waits up to 30 seconds for a native startup to reach a safe detach point. An unfinished startup returns a clear failure instead of a false detach receipt. - Queued native work on the same task waits for cleanup. Unrelated tasks remain eligible. - The image digest update rebuilds the Daytona runtime image. No database migration or public API change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with repository inspection, code execution, and browser tools. The runtime does not expose the exact deployed model ID 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
64895f187b |
fix(runner): clarify completion errors and restart test failures (#13682)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages work across persistent agent sessions. > - The runner validates completion calls before accepting their results. > - Generic validation errors can leave the agent unable to repair a rejected call. > - Restart tests also exempted every later failure on an intentionally interrupted run. > - This change gives bounded schema feedback and limits the test exemption to expected interruption outcomes. > - Failures become easier to repair and diagnose without changing authorization or task prompts. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13674 and #13676. Related environment and Agent Chat fixes landed in #13677 and #13678. Those changes do not cover these diagnostics. **What happened?** A malformed completion call received a general field list without the failed schema location. The everyday restart test hid later adapter errors on an intentionally interrupted run until its deadline. A clean pnpm install also broke the shutdown test because it resolved an undeclared Playwright package. **Expected behavior** Return enough schema information to repair completion calls without returning submitted values. Fail promptly on an unexpected recovery error. Resolve the declared test package's CLI. **Steps to reproduce** Run the new completion-validation and everyday lifecycle regressions against the parent commit. The new assertions fail there. Run the shutdown test in a clean workspace installation. **Paperclip version or commit** Based on master |
||
|
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> |