mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-11 05:11:49 +01:00
96bf004a79d38b021676e5cc42dfca31c4042b8f
4
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
4d82f5eaea | copy: unify user-facing "company" wording to "organization" (#12243) | ||
|
|
49d1abc458 |
fix(ui): detail the env unsaved-changes banner and guard against draft loss (#9391)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Instance settings include an Environments section where operators configure execution environments, each with an environment-variables editor for run-time bindings > - The editor showed a bare "Unsaved changes" banner that never said which variables changed, sometimes appeared the moment a saved config was opened (a lossy round-trip through the editor's emit rules made clean values look dirty), and the environment form let you navigate away without any confirmation, silently dropping the draft > - Operators could not tell what was unsaved, distrusted the phantom banner, and lost half-finished environment edits to a stray click — the agent configuration page already confirms before discarding, so environments behaved inconsistently > - This pull request lists the new/edited/removed variable names under the banner, normalizes both sides of the dirty comparison so saved values no longer look dirty on open, and confirms before cancel, in-app navigation, or tab unload while the form has unsaved changes > - The benefit is that the banner is trustworthy and specific, and unsaved environment edits can no longer be lost without an explicit confirmation ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related (not fixed by this PR): #8930 introduced the current environment-variables editor and its unsaved-changes banner; #9386 moved environment create/edit from a modal to routed pages, which this PR's navigation guard builds on. No existing public issue for the defects themselves; described per the bug report template: **What happened?** The environment-variables editor in Environments settings showed a bare "Unsaved changes" banner with no indication of which variables changed. For some saved configurations (names with surrounding whitespace, incomplete secret references, duplicate names differing only by whitespace) the banner appeared immediately on opening the edit form, before any user input. Navigating away from the environment form — cancel, an in-app link, or closing the tab — silently discarded the draft with no confirmation. **Expected behavior** The banner should say which variables are new, edited, or removed; a freshly opened saved configuration should show no banner; and leaving the form with unsaved changes should require an explicit confirmation, consistent with the agent configuration page. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open Settings → Instance settings → Environments and edit an environment whose saved config round-trips lossily (e.g. an env var name stored with trailing whitespace) — the "Unsaved changes" banner appears with no user edits. 2. Add or edit a variable — the banner gives no hint of what is unsaved. 3. With a dirty draft, click any in-app link or Cancel — the draft is dropped with no confirmation. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted (local development instance), reproducible on `master`. ## What Changed - The unsaved-changes banner in `EnvironmentVariablesEditor` now renders a change summary line — `New: … · Edited: … · Removed: …` — showing up to three names per group with a `+N more` overflow and the full list in a `title` tooltip. A rename shows as one addition plus one removal. - Dirty detection normalizes both the committed value and the draft through the same rules the editor uses when emitting values (trimmed names, incomplete secret refs dropped, last-writer-wins on trimmed duplicates), so a saved config that round-trips lossily no longer shows a phantom banner on first open. - The editor exposes an `onDirtyChange` callback and warns via `beforeunload` while its local draft is dirty. - The environment create/edit page (`CompanyEnvironments`) tracks a payload-level baseline fingerprint of the form as initialized and treats the page as having unsaved changes when the current form differs from it or the editor draft is dirty. While dirty it confirms ("Discard unsaved environment changes?") on Cancel, intercepts same-origin in-app link clicks, and warns on tab unload. ## Verification - `node_modules/.bin/vitest run ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx ui/src/components/environment-variables-editor/EnvironmentVariablesEditor.test.tsx` — 48 tests pass, including new coverage for: the change-summary banner text, no phantom banner for lossy round-trip values, beforeunload only while dirty, cancel confirmation on the edit page, and unload/link-click warnings after edits are staged into the form. - `tsc -b` in `ui/` passes. - Manual: edit an environment, add/edit/remove variables, observe the summary line; click Cancel or an in-app link and observe the confirmation; save and observe navigation proceeds without prompting. ## Risks - Low risk, UI-only. The click interceptor is scoped to same-origin anchor navigation while the environment form page has unsaved changes and is removed on cleanup; modified-key/middle-button clicks and external links are left alone. - The dirty-normalization intentionally ignores differences the editor could never persist (incomplete secret refs, untrimmed duplicate names); those were previously reported as unsaved changes that could not be saved away. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5 (`claude-fable-5`, Anthropic) via Claude Code, with extended thinking and tool use (code editing, test execution). ## 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 - [ ] 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 |
||
|
|
ad961227f5 |
feat(secrets): add user-specific runtime secrets (#8825)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent runs often need provider credentials, API tokens, and other environment-bound secrets. > - Company-level secrets work for shared credentials, but they do not model values that should differ by human operator. > - Without a user-scoped model, a run can dispatch without knowing whether the responsible human has supplied the needed value. > - Paperclip also needs run attribution to make those user-scoped runtime checks deterministic and auditable. > - This pull request adds user-specific secret definitions, per-user values, environment bindings, responsible-user attribution, and runtime resolution gates. > - The benefit is that teams can define the secret once, let each user provide their own value, and block runs before dispatch when required user secrets or active definitions are unavailable. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #224 Refs #6057 This PR implements user-specific secret support as a core secret-management capability rather than a one-off adapter setting. It is related to existing public work on company secrets UI and runtime secret refs, but is distinct because the value is owned by the responsible user and resolved at run dispatch time. Related PR search before opening found existing secrets work such as #1550, #8256, #8614, #8634, and #8647; none of those add the full user-secret definition/value/runtime gate covered here. ## What Changed - Added user-secret definitions and per-user "My secrets" values, keeping stored values out of access metadata. - Added `user_secret_ref` environment bindings and UI affordances to pick them alongside existing secret refs. - Added responsible-user runtime resolution so user-secret refs resolve against the human responsible for the run. - Added pre-dispatch missing-secret gates so runs fail before adapter dispatch when required user values are absent or definitions are inactive. - Added low-trust allowlist hardening for user-secret runtime access. - Added issue, routine, run, and agent API key responsible-user attribution and fail-closed dispatch behavior when attribution cannot be resolved. - Added denial-copy mapping so responsible-user authorization failures surface as actionable run outcomes instead of opaque setup failures. - Added OpenAPI documentation for the user-secret routes. - Rebases cleanly on current `master`; migrations were renumbered incrementally as `0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and `0130_run_responsible_user_invariant` after upstream `0126`/`0127` migrations. - Removed previously committed local design screenshots so the PR contains code/docs/tests only. ## Verification - PASS: PR head `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` is based on `paperclipai/paperclip:master`. - PASS: `git diff --check` - PASS: `git diff --name-only public/master...HEAD | rg '^(pnpm-lock\\.yaml|\\.github/workflows/|screenshots/)' || true` produced no files. - PASS: migration journal audit confirmed unique indexes through `130` with tail entries `0126_issue_comment_derived_attribution`, `0127_environment_custom_images_instance_scoped`, `0128_user_specific_secrets`, `0129_agent_api_key_responsible_user`, and `0130_run_responsible_user_invariant`. - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-responsible-user-invariant.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-active-run-output-watchdog.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-stale-queue-invalidation.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-workspace-finalize-branch.test.ts src/__tests__/issue-monitor-scheduler.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-retry-scheduling.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-accepted-plan-workspace-refresh.test.ts src/__tests__/heartbeat-plugin-environment.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/low-trust-red-team-routes.test.ts` - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (55 tests) - PASS: `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` (89 tests after final Greptile cleanup fixes) - PASS: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/heartbeat-issue-liveness-escalation.test.ts` (17 tests after the final rebase CI fix) - PASS: focused server Vitest batches covering heartbeat recovery, project env, plugin env, routines, low-trust, pipelines, monitors, watchdog, and stale queue paths. - PASS: GitHub checks are green on `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6`, including Typecheck + Release Registry, Build, General tests, serialized server suites, e2e, Canary Dry Run, verify, security checks, and Greptile Review. - PASS: Greptile Review completed successfully on `2527febd106bcf3ca264ca0da7fca491084192d6` with Confidence Score 5/5, and GraphQL review-thread audit returned zero unresolved non-outdated threads. ## Risks - Runtime behavior now depends on a run having a correct responsible user; missing or incorrect responsibility assignment can block runs before adapter dispatch. - `user_secret_ref` bindings intentionally expose metadata without values, but UI/API callers may need to handle the new binding kind explicitly. - External secret providers and IAM policies are not automatically provisioned by this PR; operators still need to configure provider-side access for non-local vaults. - The PR is broad across db/shared/server/UI/runtime paths, so release validation should include both API and UI secret workflows before merge. - The migration renumbering is intentionally incremental after upstream migrations; the branch migrations use guarded column/table/index/constraint creation so users who tested the older draft numbering should not hit duplicate DDL for the existing objects. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent (`gpt-5`), Codex local adapter with shell/tool use and code execution. Context window and internal reasoning mode are not exposed by the runtime. ## 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> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
b5c914126e |
Redesign environment variables editor (#8930)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Environment variables and secrets sit in the configuration surfaces that let agents, projects, routines, and company environments run with the right runtime inputs. > - The previous editor was a single legacy component with cramped row behavior, weak secret conversion affordances, and duplicated handling across several call sites. > - Operators need a clearer editor that handles text values, secret references, draft rows, and sensitive-value warnings consistently wherever environment variables are configured. > - This pull request replaces the legacy editor with a reusable environment variables editor and migrates the existing configuration surfaces to it. > - The benefit is a more reliable editing workflow with targeted test coverage around row state, dotenv parsing, secret selection, and affected page integrations. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists, so this PR describes the issue inline following the feature request template. ### Subsystem affected ui/ — React + Vite board UI ### Problem or motivation Environment variables are edited in several Paperclip configuration surfaces, including agent config, project properties, stage secrets, routine sections, company environments, and company settings. The legacy editor made common operator work difficult: rows could feel cramped, secret conversion was inconsistent, draft rows and imported dotenv data were easy to mishandle, and sensitive-value warnings did not have a consistent place in the workflow. ### Proposed solution Introduce a reusable environment variables editor component that consistently supports text values, secret references, draft rows, dotenv import parsing, sensitive-value hints, secret picking, secret creation, and conversion to stored secrets. Migrate the existing environment-variable call sites to the shared editor so behavior and tests live in one component family. ### Alternatives considered Keeping the existing `EnvVarEditor` and patching individual call sites would preserve duplication and leave each surface responsible for its own row and secret handling. This PR instead centralizes the behavior so future fixes cover all migrated surfaces. ### Roadmap alignment Checked `ROADMAP.md`; this does not duplicate a named roadmap item. It supports the existing local-first and deployment-oriented product direction by improving the UI where operators configure runtime environment values. ### Additional context The PR includes targeted tests for the editor model, dotenv parsing, sensitive-value detection, component behavior, affected page integrations, and Greptile review regressions around external saves and bulk import immutability. ## What Changed - Replaced the legacy `EnvVarEditor` with a reusable `environment-variables-editor` component family. - Added editor model helpers for draft rows, dotenv parsing, sensitive-value detection, secret picking, secret creation, and conversion to secret references. - Migrated agent config, project properties, stage secrets, routine editable sections, company environments, company settings, design guide examples, and Storybook stories to the new editor. - Added targeted tests for the editor model, parsing, sensitive-value detection, component behavior, and affected company environment/settings integrations. - Fixed the company settings test harness to use the repo’s `flushSync`-based React test helper pattern under the current React build. - Addressed Greptile feedback by flushing pending editor drafts before enclosing form submits or external save-button clicks, cloning bulk-import rows before mutation, and deferring the overflow store-as-secret popover open path. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/environment-variables-editor/EnvironmentVariablesEditor.test.tsx ui/src/pages/CompanyEnvironments.test.tsx ui/src/components/AgentConfigForm.render.test.tsx` — passed, 3 files / 40 tests. - Earlier focused Vitest coverage for model, dotenv parsing, sensitive detection, company environments, and company settings passed, 6 files / 78 tests. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` — passed. - GitHub PR checks on head `0aa49c6f8afed1f62d9e26da07fc466fbf299850` — passed; CI checks green, security review neutral, Greptile check success. - Greptile review — 5/5 confidence on head `0aa49c6f8afed1f62d9e26da07fc466fbf299850`; 0 unresolved review threads. ## Risks - Medium UI risk: several environment-variable entry surfaces now share the new editor, so regressions could affect multiple configuration workflows at once. - Secret conversion, draft-row behavior, external save flushing, and bulk import behavior are covered by targeted tests, but reviewer attention should still focus on manual editing flows, focus retention, and save/cancel affordances. - No database or API contract changes. > 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, GPT-5-based coding agent with tool use and local command execution; medium reasoning mode. Exact context-window metadata is not exposed in this runtime. ## 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: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |