mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
7ed122911be94514551c35a3d0180d77cfb9aef0
4
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
3ad494aacd |
fix(adapter-utils): preserve legacy sandbox PATH with managed GitHub (#13051)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people manage AI agents and their work. > - Remote agents need both their installed tools and managed GitHub credentials. > - The GitHub launcher replaces a missing remote PATH with a small system path. > - Legacy images install agent CLIs outside that path, so those agents cannot start. > - This pull request preserves the remote toolchain and puts managed GitHub commands first. > - Command checks now use the same environment as execution. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13005. Related: #10239 fixes a separate Cursor environment path issue. Searched open issues and PRs for sandbox PATH and GitHub launcher changes. No duplicate of this launcher fix was found. **What happened?** A remote Claude or Codex run passes command discovery, then fails with `command not found` and exit code 127. Managed GitHub launchers use only their own directory and `/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin`. This drops NVM and other toolchain directories from the sandbox path. **Expected behavior** Agent CLIs remain available on legacy and current sandbox images. Managed `git` and `gh` still resolve first and use the responsible person's credentials. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a sandbox whose agent CLI is installed in an NVM or other non-system bin directory. 2. Start an agent run with managed GitHub launchers and no explicit PATH override. 3. Observe that command discovery succeeds but the agent command exits with code 127. **Paperclip version or commit** Observed on `b97101893f0926f57ed0ce9ef1f8d3e4780c62c2`. The same launcher behavior remains on the base commit `be6bb768b`. **Deployment mode** Hosted server with remote sandbox execution. The shared launcher also supports SSH targets. ## What Changed - Read the remote target's effective PATH when no remote override is set. Do not copy an inherited controller PATH. - Prepend the managed launcher directory and retain the combined path in shell startup files. - Stop startup if path discovery fails. Frame the response so login banners cannot contaminate PATH. - Pass the sanitized launch environment to sandbox command checks, installation, and the second check. - Add real shell tests for legacy and current CLI layouts, quoted paths, managed GitHub command execution, explicit overrides, SSH, and failure cases. - Document the remote path contract. ## Verification - Four focused adapter utility suites passed: 153 tests. - The regression suite passed: 13 tests, including the Linux stdin handling fix. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck` passed. - Full workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - The regression suite fails on the unchanged base revision (12 failures, 1 pass) and passes with this change (13 passes). The baseline ran in an isolated scratch copy. - Full local test coverage was attempted using the official CI shards. The run was stopped after macOS Postgres shared-memory exhaustion and CLI timeouts under load. The affected server database suite passed in isolation (31 tests), as did the five affected DB/CLI suites (89 tests). - [Full Linux CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34258333833) passed on `4e1426f5b`: all general and serialized test shards, all browser shards, typecheck and release registry checks, native runner verification, application build, and release canary dry run. - Greptile scored the latest commit 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Shell tests use isolated local fixtures and make no provider or model requests. No live sandbox qualification is claimed. ## Risks - Remote startup adds one bounded path query when no explicit override exists. A failed query stops startup. - Explicit remote path overrides still control which tools are available. Invalid overrides now fail the command check earlier. - Credential selection and GitHub broker policy are unchanged. Tests verify managed wrappers stay first and can invoke underlying commands. - No database migration or sandbox image replacement is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository editing, and terminal tools. The exact serving 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
db85bf4b7a |
fix(ui): simplify GitHub repository access controls (#13047)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents and their connected apps. > - GitHub permissions show which repositories an account can access. > - The page adds an account dropdown and search above the repository list. > - These controls add clutter to a view meant to show the full access list. > - This change removes both controls and their filtering state. > - People see all repositories directly, with the existing scrolling and access controls. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12998. **Current behavior** GitHub permissions show an “All accounts” dropdown and a “Search repositories” input above the repository list. **Proposed behavior** Show the full repository list directly. Keep the scroll limit, repository links, private-repository icons, refresh button, and GitHub configuration links. **Reason and benefit** Remove unnecessary controls from the access summary. Users manage repository permissions on GitHub. ## What Changed - Remove the account dropdown, search input, filtering state, and unused imports. - Rename the GitHub configuration button to “Add More Repos on GitHub”. - Render every returned repository and simplify the empty-list message. - Update the existing multi-account test and permissions documentation. ## Verification - All 55 AppDetail tests passed. - `pnpm check:token-gates` passed. - Full `pnpm build` and `pnpm -r typecheck` passed. All 31 CI checks passed on `cb9b8bb14a880d926393c62821265fbd2d8c5d31`. Storybook visual regression was correctly skipped. - Fresh Greptile review on the same commit: 5/5, with no unresolved findings. ## Risks Users can no longer narrow this list by account or search text. The list still scrolls and shows each repository’s full owner/name. This change does not alter GitHub permissions or credential selection. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with code editing and shell verification tools. The exact model variant 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
297d8741f5 |
fix: resolve duplicate connections to the same GitHub account (#13022)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip lets people share agents while keeping GitHub access personal. > - Each managed Git or GitHub operation selects an eligible connection grant. > - Connecting the same GitHub account twice creates two grants. > - The old resolver counted grants and rejected them as competing identities. > - Managed commands then ran anonymously and reported a misleading login failure. > - This change compares GitHub account IDs and selects one eligible grant for the same account. > - The benefit is reliable access after reconnecting, with clear diagnostics for real failures. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #13005. **What happened?** Two active connections owned by one Paperclip user pointed to the same GitHub account. Managed Git refused both as ambiguous. The agent could not push, although the account was connected and had repository access. **Expected behavior** Multiple grants for the same GitHub account resolve to one eligible authorization. Different accounts remain ambiguous. Unavailable access explains its cause without blocking unrelated work. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Connect the same GitHub account twice for one Paperclip user and allow the shared agent through both connection audiences. 2. Start an instruction as that user. 3. Run managed gh or git push. Before this fix, no credential is provided. ## What Changed - Compare stable GitHub account IDs when more than one eligible grant exists. Never deduplicate by login alone. - Prefer an available grant, then the newest authorization with a stable ID tie-breaker. Refresh and webhook timestamps do not change the selection. - Keep the selected credential and connection policy together. Do not combine permissions or fall back from a dedicated account to a personal account. - Print the redacted unavailable reason in managed command output. Unrelated local operations still work anonymously. - Add database and executable launcher regressions, and document selection behavior. ## Verification - Final `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. - Fourteen operation credential integration tests passed, covering duplicate personal/dedicated grants, incomplete credentials, distinct accounts with the same login, missing identity metadata, revocation, membership, connection audiences, and A → B → A steering. Existing Git credential and gateway suites and both executable launcher tests also passed. - The local broad test run encountered three embedded-Postgres lifecycle timeouts and stale modules from edits made during that run. A fresh process rerun of all four affected suites passed all 35 tests. The full Node 24 CI test matrix passed on the final commit. - CI passed all 31 checks on `797973b30beb16ba5fa69ed281835e1ab812b449` (Storybook visual regression was correctly skipped). An unrelated Company Settings UI test failed once; the focused local reproduction and rerun of its CI shard both passed without code changes. - Fresh Greptile review of the final commit: 5/5, with no open findings. Security checks passed. - Live acceptance passed with both duplicate connections enabled: managed `gh api user` returned the expected account, managed `git push` succeeded, and the agent created #13023 and pushed its review fixes. No host login or credential changes were used. - Applied the final source/compiled patch to the affected instance with backups, after confirming no runs were active. Restarted service health and the final resolver selection were verified. The patch is an overlay on the existing deployment; this PR supplies the upstream fix. ## Risks The resolver selects one authorization for an already permitted GitHub account. It does not combine repository permissions across connections. If the selected authorization has narrower access, that operation can still be denied by GitHub. Different provider account IDs and unknown duplicate identities continue to fail closed. No schema, host credential, or connection permission changes are included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation and verification with shell, database, and browser tools. The exact model variant 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
1cc45086d3 |
feat: use the responsible person's GitHub for shared agent operations (#13005)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Several people can send instructions to the same agent and task. > - A fixed GitHub token in the provider process can keep the first person's access after another person's message is accepted. > - Task ownership cannot select credentials for each accepted instruction or preserve the identity of an operation already in progress. > - This pull request records ordered execution identity contexts and resolves credentials when managed Git, gh, or GitHub tools start. > - The benefit is automatic personal GitHub access for shared agents, with durable continuation rules and no teammate credential fallback. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting: orchestration, connection grants, database, runtime adapters, native runners, and run details. **Problem or motivation** A shared agent must use the person whose instructions it has accepted. A queued message must retain its author. A retry or approval without new instructions must retain the originating identity. GitHub must remain optional for ordinary work. **Proposed solution** Persist execution identity separately from task ownership. Give new processes a run-scoped broker capability and token-free managed launchers. Capture identity at operation start. Keep an explicit dedicated-agent grant as an override. Show redacted diagnostics in run details. **Alternatives considered** Per-task ownership, fixed provider tokens, and mutable repository author configuration do not handle accepted steering or concurrent operations. A manual account-selection action would add unnecessary setup to each turn. **Roadmap alignment** This completes the existing Multiple Human Users, MCP Tool Gateway & Apps, Secrets Manager, and Self-healing Runs capabilities. The implementation follows the maintainer-approved plan. Related work: Refs #12843, Refs #12907. Existing proposals #4618 and #8945 cover per-agent or per-worktree author configuration. This change instead follows the accepted human instruction across runtime types. Refs #11831 for governed personal connection delegation; this change preserves connection audience checks and does not use standing delegation as a personal credential fallback. ## What Changed - Add durable, ordered identity contexts and active run references. Preserve message authors through consolidation, steering, retries, delegation, approvals, routines, and restart. - Add an authenticated operation-time GitHub credential broker and local/remote managed git and gh launchers. Keep personal tokens out of the long-lived provider process. - Resolve GitHub gateway and server-side Git operations through the same responsible-person or dedicated-grant selection rules. - Make absent and unavailable GitHub credentials non-blocking at generic startup. Clear host and prior-person credentials. Keep anonymous Git access where supported. - Add run-detail identity history and the dedicated-account warning. Keep task ownership and queue-versus-steer decisions unchanged. - Preserve personal OAuth declarations through connection edits. Retain exact selected grants in the gateway. - Fix continuation races found during real acceptance: verify a warm owner before credential rotation, and wait for bounded durable runner suspension before the next run starts. - Make migrations replay-safe. Retain identity through agent/run deletion, remove it with its company, and clean terminal launcher directories before releasing execution environments. Document coordinated release and rollback. ## Verification - Full workspace typecheck, build, and token gates passed. The complete local suite passed in its normal test groups: 17,120 passing tests, including all 143 serialized server suites. After integrating the newly merged runner API work, full local typecheck and build passed again, along with 890 focused integration tests. All 31 checks on the integrated revision passed, including build, browser E2E, release registry, canary dry run, typecheck, security and all test suites. Greptile is 5/5 with all review threads resolved. - Current focused checks passed: 142 native executor tests, 67 runtime lifecycle tests, 9 durable identity tests, 75 credential/routine tests, 19 low-trust/resumption tests, and the executable migration replay test. - Authenticated browser acceptance with two Paperclip users and two GitHub accounts on one shared native agent passed. Real commits and pushes followed A → B accepted steering → queued A continuation in the same saved conversation. GitHub commit author and committer identities matched all three operations. Both runs succeeded and task ownership stayed unchanged. - Real GitHub MCP calls switched from A to B after accepted steering. A delegated subtask retained its originating identity across a server restart. - Disabling B's GitHub connection left ordinary work successful. Managed gh was unauthenticated and the provider had no inherited GH_TOKEN or GITHUB_TOKEN. - The browser displayed run-detail diagnostics and the exact dedicated-account warning. A final controller-restart check followed by another-person continuation retained the conversation, selected the correct GitHub login and Git author, and removed each terminal launcher directory. - Company-lifetime migration and all five previously failing CI suites passed locally (167 tests). Same-token gateway A → B → A and six broker/launcher boundary tests passed. - Remote callback, launcher, sandbox, and runtime contract tests passed. Both native and legacy Codex completed actual Daytona executions on the integrated revision ([campaign results](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/34155056509)). The remote package-manager shim staging regression also passed locally. ## Risks - Deploy the migrations, server broker, launchers, and runner artifacts together. Existing processes finish with their original contract. New managed processes need the broker endpoint for GitHub operations. - Finish or stop new managed executions before rolling application code back. Keep the additive schema and identity history during rollback. - Scripts that require a persistent raw GH_TOKEN must use managed git, gh, or GitHub gateway tools. Run capabilities authorize code executing within that run to acquire its current identity; this is not hostile-code isolation within one execution principal. Managed commands prevent automatic credential carryover; arbitrary code deliberately copying a credential is outside that boundary. - Uncertain steering acknowledgement deliberately holds new credential acquisition until reconciliation. Already-started operations retain their captured identity. - GitHub private access and provider outages can still fail the specific operation that needs them. Dedicated grant failure does not fall back to personal access. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex assisted implementation, review, shell execution, and browser acceptance. The exact model variant and context-window size are not exposed in this session. Tool use included TypeScript and Rust tests, database integration tests, GitHub CLI, and authenticated browser control. ## 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> |