mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 10:48:12 +02:00
8b2dbd9d8716dab37325ad41618a32b12053c324
5
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
8b2dbd9d87 |
chore(deps): open one dependabot PR per major update (#11709)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Dependabot keeps the project dependencies current.
> - The npm update rule groups all major updates into one pull request.
> - One blocked major update can stop that grouped pull request.
> - This pull request gives each major update its own pull request.
> - The higher limit keeps the initial major updates and normal updates
visible.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
Dependabot grouped all npm major updates into one weekly pull request. A
blocked upgrade stopped the grouped pull request and hid other ready
updates.
**Expected behavior**
Dependabot should open one pull request for each npm major update.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Read the npm entry in `.github/dependabot.yml`.
2. Run the weekly Dependabot update.
3. Inspect the pull requests for major npm updates.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at the base commit for this pull request.
**Deployment mode**
Not applicable. This change affects repository configuration.
**Installation method**
Not applicable. This change affects repository configuration.
**Agent adapter(s) involved**
Not adapter-specific (repository configuration).
**Database mode**
Not database-related.
**Additional context**
The grouped major update included a blocked `js-yaml` upgrade. Separate
pull requests let other major updates proceed independently.
## What Changed
- Remove the `major-updates` group from the npm Dependabot entry.
- Raise the npm `open-pull-requests-limit` from 10 to 20.
- Keep the GitHub Actions Dependabot entry unchanged.
## Verification
- Run `python3 -c "import yaml;
yaml.safe_load(open('.github/dependabot.yml'))"`.
- Confirm the diff changes only `.github/dependabot.yml`.
- Confirm CI passes on this pull request.
## Risks
This change can open more Dependabot pull requests. The limit of 20
bounds the number of open npm update pull requests. No application code
changes.
## Model Used
OpenAI GPT-5. Tool use and code repository inspection assisted this
change.
## 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
|
d24a79f741 |
ci(dependabot): surface major npm updates as one grouped weekly PR (#11307)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Dependabot keeps the npm dependency tree and the GitHub Actions workflows current with weekly update PRs > - The npm config ignores every major version bump with a wildcard `ignore` rule, and no other process reports pending majors > - Major-version debt grows silently, and ignore rules also suppress Dependabot security updates when the fix ships only in a newer major > - Individual major PRs are not a good replacement: the board decided in #7560 to keep the PR list mergeable, and a flood of breaking bumps works against that > - This pull request removes the blanket ignore and groups all pending majors into one weekly PR, while minors and patches keep one PR per bump > - The benefit is a standing, visible signal of pending major updates, at a cost of at most one extra PR per week ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The Dependabot npm update flow configured in `.github/dependabot.yml`. **Current behavior** Dependabot opens weekly PRs for minor and patch npm updates. A wildcard `ignore` rule suppresses every major version update. No report or reminder replaces the suppressed PRs — the comment says "review those manually", but nothing triggers that review. Ignore rules also apply to Dependabot security updates, so a security fix that ships only in a newer major is suppressed as well. **Proposed behavior** Dependabot opens one grouped weekly PR that contains every pending major npm update. Minor and patch updates keep their current one-PR-per-bump flow. A deliberate hold on a specific major can use a targeted per-dependency `ignore` entry instead of the wildcard. **Reason and benefit** Silent major-version drift compounds: each skipped major makes the eventual upgrade jump larger and riskier, especially across peer-dependency families. A single grouped PR makes the backlog visible in the PR list without flooding it. When the grouped PR is green, it merges cheaply. When it is red, it is a visible standing task instead of invisible debt. **Breaking changes** None. This changes repository automation only. Runtime behavior, response shapes, and outputs are unchanged. **Additional context** Related history: #7483 grouped patch/minor updates by dependency type, and #7560 reverted that grouping because the resulting 26-package PR was hard to merge. This PR does not touch the patch/minor flow. It only groups majors, which currently produce no PRs at all — it adds a signal that does not exist today rather than replacing individually mergeable PRs. ## What Changed - Removed the wildcard `ignore` rule for `version-update:semver-major` from the npm ecosystem in `.github/dependabot.yml`. - Added a `major-updates` group (`applies-to: version-updates`, `update-types: ["major"]`, `patterns: ["*"]`) so all pending majors land in one weekly grouped PR. - Left the schedule, labels, PR limits, and the github-actions ecosystem unchanged. ## Verification - `npx js-yaml .github/dependabot.yml` parses cleanly and the `groups` stanza follows the Dependabot v2 schema (`applies-to`, `update-types`, `patterns`). - After merge: check Insights → Dependency graph → Dependabot for config errors. The next weekly run (Monday 06:00) opens a single `major-updates` grouped PR that lists the pending majors. - No code changed, so the test suite is unaffected. ## Risks - Low risk. This is CI/automation configuration only. - The first grouped PR may be large, and red if several majors break the build. That is the intended visibility mechanism, and it does not block other work. A noisy or deliberately held-back dependency can be excluded from the group with `exclude-patterns` or a targeted per-dependency `ignore` entry. - This does not regroup minors or patches, so it does not reintroduce what #7560 reverted. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5`, via Claude Code CLI, extended thinking and tool use 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — N/A, YAML-only CI config change; validated with `js-yaml` - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable — N/A, no code changed - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — none reference the Dependabot config - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green — one e2e shard flaked on an unrelated MCP UI spec and passed on re-run with identical code - [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 |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
9d1f1f5e33 |
revert(ci): remove dependabot dependency grouping (#7560)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, so its automation and CI surfaces need to stay reliable enough for agent-driven maintenance work. > - Dependabot configuration is part of that maintenance path because it determines how dependency updates reach the repo and CI. > - PR #7483 changed `.github/dependabot.yml` to group all npm patch/minor updates by dependency type. > - That immediately produced a 26-package grouped PR that was difficult to merge and contradicted the board's decision to return to one-PR-per-bump. > - This pull request reverts only the grouping behavior while preserving the rest of the Dependabot schedule, labels, limits, and ignore rules. > - The benefit is a narrower, more reviewable Dependabot flow that restores the previous operational behavior without changing unrelated CI settings. ## What Changed - Removed the npm `groups:` block from `.github/dependabot.yml`. - Left the existing weekly schedule, labels, open PR limit, and major-version ignore rules unchanged. - Isolated the revert onto a clean branch containing only commit `446453516c` so this PR does not include unrelated local CI work. ## Verification - `ruby -e 'require "yaml"; YAML.load_file(".github/dependabot.yml")'` - `git diff --check origin/master..PAPA-522-revert-dependabot-grouping` - Inspect the PR diff and confirm only `.github/dependabot.yml` changed. ## Risks - Low risk. This only removes the grouping stanza and restores previous Dependabot behavior. - Operationally, this returns to a higher number of smaller Dependabot PRs, which is the intended tradeoff for easier mergeability and triage. > 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 via the local `codex_local` Paperclip adapter, GPT-5-based coding agent backend with tool use and shell execution enabled. The exact backend model ID/context window is not exposed by this adapter run. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] 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 |
||
|
Devin Foley
|
69e513efe1 |
ci(dependabot): bundle npm patch/minor updates by dependency type (#7483)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - Dependabot keeps the JS/TS dependency tree up to date so the agents and UI run on supported package versions > - When a sibling package family shares peer dependencies (lexical core + `@lexical/*`, `@codemirror/*`, `@radix-ui/*`, `@assistant-ui/*`, etc.), bumping one without the others leaves the lockfile with two installed copies of the core package > - That trips TypeScript: nodes from one version are not assignable to types from the other, and the UI build fails — observed concretely on PR #7330 (lexical 0.35 → 0.45) once PAPA-490 stopped masking it > - The first cut (per-scope `groups` for each sibling-package family) works but requires maintenance whenever a new scope is added > - This pull request goes broader: it groups *all* npm patch/minor updates by dependency type (production vs development), so any sibling-package family is bundled regardless of scope > - The benefit is a single weekly PR per dep type, no per-scope maintenance, and no more partial peer bumps ## What Changed - Replaced the lexical-specific `groups` entry with two type-based groups in `.github/dependabot.yml`: - `production-dependencies`: bundles all patch/minor `dependencies` updates into one PR - `development-dependencies`: bundles all patch/minor `devDependencies` updates into one PR - Majors continue to land as individual PRs (and are already ignored by the existing `version-update:semver-major` rule). ## Verification - After merge, the next Dependabot run (Monday 06:00 weekly, or on `@dependabot recreate`) should open at most two new npm PRs — `chore(deps): bump the production-dependencies group` and `chore(deps-dev): bump the development-dependencies group` — each combining many bumps. The existing per-package PRs (#7318–#7331) will be closed and superseded by the grouped PRs. - Sanity-check by inspecting the resulting lockfile diff: `lexical` and `@lexical/link` should always move together to the same version. ## Risks - Low risk for CI config itself. The trade-off is larger weekly PRs that are harder to bisect when one bump breaks the batch — but Dependabot also publishes per-package failure reports inside the grouped PR, so triage stays tractable. - If a future package genuinely needs to stay ungrouped (e.g. a noisy one that breaks often), it can be moved out via `exclude-patterns` on the group. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), claude-opus-4-7, tool-use 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass — N/A, YAML-only CI config change - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable — N/A - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots — N/A - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes — N/A - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge |
||
|
|
96feaa331a |
feat(commitperclip): add automated PR quality and security gates (#6469)
Fixes #6470 ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is an open-source AI agent platform receiving a high volume of community PRs — currently 2,398 open > - The contributor experience is broken: PRs sit for months with no feedback, contributors don't know why they're stuck, and maintainers spend review time on PRs that are missing basics > - Common problems: no linked issue, no test coverage, incomplete PR template, manually-edited lockfile — all catchable before human review > - At the same time, accepting untrusted PRs from unknown contributors is a real attack surface: malicious packages, secret injection, tampering with CI scripts, and code touching the sensitive paths from the April security advisories > - This PR adds automated gates that run on every PR: quality failures get a clear comment telling contributors exactly what to fix, security concerns are silently flagged as draft advisories and block merge via a pending check run > - The benefit is a dramatically faster feedback loop for good-faith contributors and a meaningful security layer for the maintainers reviewing them ## What Changed - **`.github/workflows/commitperclip-review.yml`** — new workflow using `pull_request_target` (runs in base branch context, has secrets, never executes PR code). Runs quality gates + security gates on every PR open/update. - **`.github/dependabot.yml`** — weekly automated dependency vulnerability PRs for npm and GitHub Actions. - **`.github/scripts/get-bot-token.mjs`** — generates a short-lived commitperclip installation token from `COMMITPERCLIP_KEY` secret. - **`.github/scripts/run-quality-gates.mjs`** — orchestrates 5 quality gates, posts/updates a single consolidated comment on the PR. - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-template.mjs`** — validates all 5 required template sections, Thinking Path depth (≥3 sentences), Model Used not placeholder. - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-linked-issue.mjs`** — requires `Fixes #NNN` or issue URL in PR body. - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-test-coverage.mjs`** — requires at least one test file in the diff. - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-lockfile.mjs`** — blocks manual `pnpm-lock.yaml` edits (only the refresh bot may change it). - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-dependencies.mjs`** — informational comment when new npm packages are added. - **`.github/scripts/check-pr-security.mjs`** — 6 silent security checks: secret patterns, CI workflow tampering, build script changes, supply chain (new packages in lockfile), suspicious test patterns (outbound network/shell exec/env var reads), and changes to the 9 sensitive path prefixes from the April advisories. When any fire: creates a draft security advisory + sets `security-review` check to `in_progress` (blocks merge). When clean: sets `security-review` to `success`. - **`actions/dependency-review-action@v4`** — per-PR dependency vulnerability check (fails if new dep has known CVE). - **44 unit tests** across all gate modules (`node:test`, no external deps). ## Verification Run all unit tests locally: ```bash node --test .github/scripts/tests/*.test.mjs ``` Expected: 44 pass, 0 fail. End-to-end: open a PR missing the template, linked issue, and test files → commitperclip posts a consolidated comment listing all failures. Open a PR with all gates satisfied → `✅ All checks passing` comment posted, all check runs green. ## Risks **`pull_request_target` security model:** This workflow runs in base branch context and has access to secrets. It explicitly checks out `ref: master` (never PR code) and reads the PR diff via GitHub API only — no PR code is ever executed. This is the correct pattern for running secret-bearing checks on fork PRs; deviating from it (e.g. checking out the PR branch) would be a security vulnerability. **False positives on security gates:** The sensitive-path gate flags any PR touching the 9 path prefixes from the April advisories. Legitimate fixes to those paths will trigger draft advisories. This is intentional — those paths warrant a human look regardless. The `security-review` check can be manually resolved by a maintainer once reviewed. **commitperclip not yet installed:** Until the app is installed on this repo and the `COMMITPERCLIP_KEY` secret is added, the workflow will fail on the token generation step. The quality gate comment won't post, but Dependency Review will still run independently. ## Model Used Claude Sonnet 4.5, 200k context window, extended thinking enabled, tool use: read/edit files, bash execution, GitHub API calls ## 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 (44/44) - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (44 unit tests across all gate modules) - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (N/A — CI only) - [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 --- ## One-time setup needed from you, Dotta 1. **Install commitperclip app** on this repo: https://github.com/apps/commitperclip/installations/new 2. **Add `COMMITPERCLIP_KEY`** as a repository secret (Actions → Secrets) — ask @brandonburr for the key 3. **Add `security_advisories: write` and `checks: write`** to the commitperclip app permissions (commit-capital org → Settings → Apps → commitperclip → Permissions) 4. **Install Socket.dev** from GitHub Marketplace for supply chain scanning 5. **Branch protection** (optional but recommended): require `commitperclip-review` and `security-review` checks to pass before merge ## Dashboard integration note The `commitperclip-review` check run result maps cleanly to your PR triage dashboard. A single filter on your Worker: ```javascript const gatesCheck = checkRuns.find(r => r.name === 'commitperclip-review'); if (gatesCheck?.conclusion === 'failure') return null; // filter from queue ``` For security flags: `GET /repos/paperclipai/paperclip/security-advisories?state=draft` — advisory titles include `PR #NNN` for cross-referencing. PRs with a matching draft advisory have `security-review` in `in_progress` state (grey spinner, can't merge via branch protection). --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Devin Foley <devin@devinfoley.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |