mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 01:27:09 +01:00
b29334feafd5bf1740aa74e2ff0649c6b4cefc20
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
35ab90ad0f |
Map runtime activity to authorized task plugin panels (#18131)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agents and tasks. > - Plugins contribute views to the task sidebar. > - A ready view can belong to an earlier task. > - Runner records activity under its authenticated run. > - This PR maps that activity to installed task-panel declarations. > - The sidebar checks readiness after current-run use and restores use after reconnect. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Builds on merged contract #18129 and Runner publisher #18050. This PR targets master and is ready for review. Earlier combined verification is retained in [the verification archive](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18050#issuecomment-6489369676). **Subsystem affected** Run-event reads, plugin task contributions and the task sidebar. **Problem or motivation** Readiness polling can show a view left ready by another task. Reload and reconnect must recover current-run use without losing concurrent live activity. **Proposed solution** Map recorded activity to installed task-panel declarations. Merge authorized history and live activity, then perform bounded readiness checks for the running agent. Preserve the existing read-only view. ## What Changed - Add optional `{ namespace, activityKey }` activation mappings to task-panel declarations. Legacy declarations remain valid but contribute no task panel. - Add `view=plugin-panels` to the existing run-events route. Preserve run-read and telemetry-read authorization, secret redaction and private-run denial. Map activity to installed contributions and return at most 128 panel identities. - Scope activation caches to current panel versions and activity declarations. Preserve unchanged panels during unrelated plugin updates and history reads. - Merge history and live hints without losing concurrent activations. Filter by company, task, run and agent. Restore history on mount and reconnect. - Replace periodic availability checks with up to three readiness attempts after activity. Fresh activity restarts settled transient failures. Pending checks, successful readiness and HTTP 4xx failures are left alone. - Reuse live run updates with the panel cache key. Recover only panel history after a pending subscription read. Mark expected not-ready query results so the global error reporter skips them; real failures remain reportable. - Preserve current-run dismissal and the read-only plugin view. Update manifest comments and producer/consumer documentation. ## Verification - Current head: `5e04d757c`, based on master `09c05c550`. Range comparison confirmed all six feature commits were unchanged by the rebase. The final follow-up keys readiness by the plugin installation ID and availability path. - `cd ui && node ../node_modules/vitest/vitest.mjs run src/hooks/useTaskPluginPanels.test.tsx` — all 45 cases passed. `cd ui && node ../node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -b` passed. - The shared query-client and live-update recovery selection passed 96 cases on `49c544cd2`. Token gates passed before the final hook-only changes. - Earlier focused verification passed 57 manifest cases, 69 database/history cases, event-registry cases and route authorization cases, including private-run denial. - Regression coverage includes subscription/history races, task changes during recovery, unfocused run completion, bounded readiness retries, denied reads, expected not-ready responses, changed activity mappings, unchanged panel preservation, old cache scopes, and same-version route or installation changes. - [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40942001707) passed: 54 successful checks, two skips, no failures or pending checks. - [Standard and final review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18131#issuecomment-6489842168) both scored 5/5 on `5e04d757c`. The final review used the Apex tier, added no comments, and left no unresolved findings. The PR is conflict-free and ready for review. - Local checks stay targeted. GitHub CI provides the broad build, test, typecheck, browser and Runner coverage. No deployment or live-provider acceptance is claimed. <details> <summary>Retained failures and recovery evidence</summary> - `ac9329548` twice failed a browser reload assertion while conversation history was concealed. Master fixed its readiness wait in #17923. The approve journey then passed locally on `fea63a418` with installed Chrome (1 passed, 39 seconds). All eight browser shards passed in later CI. The browser test is outside this diff. - A canary checkout failed with Git HTTP 408; its unchanged-head retry passed. - `de07d09fa` failed the mobile Cases card click after a ten-second stability wait. The same read-only journey passed locally on that exact head (1 passed, 26 seconds). Its unchanged-head CI retry passed 22 cases, with one skip. The original artifact is retained; the cause of that click timeout is not established. - [CI on `49c544cd2`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40903679075) passed 54 checks with two skips. CI also passed on `de07d09fa` after the recorded retry. - The `1e59ab441` merge checkout passed all browser and server suites. Runner shard 2 passed 2,252 cases and timed out waiting for a controller-recovery command. The test had landed on master in #18161 after the former branch base. Rebasing aligned the local checkout with that code; Runner shard 2 then passed on `fcf7380d3`. The original timeout cause remains unproven; no unrelated timeout was changed. - [CI on `fcf7380d3`](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40940235193) recorded runner shutdown signals in typecheck and a workspace shard. A chat recovery test observed a null wake deadline, and one Runner transport fixture failed during close. Those separate assertion failures remain unexplained. All of those jobs passed on the final readiness-key head. Those later passes establish recovery; they do not prove the cause of the earlier assertion failures. - Local browser setup first stopped at pnpm version-download verification, then a sandbox IPC restriction, then a missing bundled browser. Installed pnpm 9.15.4 and Chrome completed the journeys. No dependency files were changed. - Earlier optional-property TypeScript errors were corrected. Embedded PostgreSQL needed its install hook run from its package directory. Older CI also recorded fixture-cleanup lock timeouts, attention-fixture timeouts, and canceled server shards after runner shutdown. The parent fixed its FIFO snapshot-copy failure before merge. The linked verification archive retains earlier combined evidence. </details> ## Risks Activity is a hint and grants no access. Missing plugins, denied reads and unavailable views contribute no panel. Older runs without activity records show no task plugin tab. A used view stays available for the running task; reconnect reconciles readiness. Matching producer and consumer builds are required. No migration, dependency, image publication or deployment is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact serving snapshot is not exposed. ## 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> |
||
|
|
a39f1b81f1 |
fix(ui): stop refetching cache-only queries without a queryFn (#18062)
Task snapshots are cached under each alias key (UUID and identifier) with setQueryData. Those entries have no queryFn until a view observes them, so inactive invalidations refetched them and failed with "Missing queryFn". The app QueryClient now skips entries without a queryFn when it refetches; invalidateQueries still marks them stale. Fixes PAPERCLIP-FRONTEND-X Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
|
39279aa34f |
feat(ui): shared error, connectivity and query foundation for disconnects (#15754)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The board reads API data and keeps the current task on screen. > - A restart or temporary network failure can interrupt those reads. > - Separate page error handlers can hide cached data or expose raw server codes. > - The app needs one connection state, readable error copy and a consistent read policy. > - This change provides that foundation and moves affected read surfaces onto it. > - The dependent write layer in #17960 preserves edits and submissions across the same failures. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Temporary API failures could replace loaded content with errors. Different surfaces handled the same outage differently. Some showed raw server codes. A successful query to an unrelated service could also falsely report that Paperclip had recovered. **Expected behavior** Keep cached content visible. Show one connection banner during sustained trouble. Confirm recovery through the Paperclip health probe or its WebSocket. Retry transient reads and show readable errors for permanent failures. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a populated task or workspace page. 2. Interrupt API requests with a 503 or a dropped connection. 3. Keep an unrelated external request in flight. 4. Confirm that cached content remains and that the external result cannot clear the outage. 5. Restore the API and check that reads refresh. The write layer first merged into this feature branch in #15769 now has its own dependent PR, #17960. This PR contains the shared foundation and read changes. Merge this PR first. ## What Changed - Classify API errors and provide readable error copy, including non-JSON proxy responses and Retry-After handling. - Use one connection store and health probe with bounded backoff. Confirm recovery from the server health probe or live-updates WebSocket. - Pause reads while disconnected, retry transient errors, and refresh active reads after recovery. - Keep cached data visible through shared query views and affected page, panel and plugin read surfaces. - Add one app-level connection banner and support the pending-write count consumed by the dependent write layer. - Add a query-error rendering guard. Call it directly from the existing CI step. Update development documentation. ## Verification - Historical-chat lookup now follows the same ready/stale roster state as rendering. Three regressions fail before the fix; the six new cases pass after it, including working Retry, fresh data, no-cache error, permanent 403 and company isolation. All six focused query/recovery suites pass 200 tests. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. Canary Dry Run initially refused a preview version that was already on npm. It passed after one rerun with fresh registry metadata; no check was disabled. - Integrated current master and retained both transcript interest registration and connectivity reporting on socket open. The seven focused recovery/query suites pass 288 tests, and UI typecheck and production build pass. All 9,451 UI tests across 799 files pass on the merge commit. Final-commit CI passes and Apex is 5/5 with no unresolved findings. - Current head `70d9335d732219352ef0f98414439766bbcb33df`: all hosted CI checks pass. Apex is **5/5** on that head with no unresolved findings. The branch has no merge conflict. GitHub still requires code-owner approval. - The foundation passes 9,430 UI tests in 804 files. After integrating current master page paths, 190 focused page tests pass. - Two unrelated-success regressions fail before the latest fix. With the fix, 62 focused UI tests, all six guard tests and UI TypeScript pass. - The composed foundation and write layer pass **9,505 UI tests in 808 files**, UI TypeScript, a production UI build, and query-error, token and map guards. - A real Chromium journey on the composed source injects a 503 during title save. The loaded task stays visible; one reconnect banner appears; the edit saves after recovery; another task stays unchanged; the saved title survives reload. - Full recursive local checks were not repeated because Runner compilation exhausted local disk during another repair. Hosted checks must pass before merge. No new staging deployment is claimed. - Latest review follow-up: a cached CaseDetail now survives a failed HTTP 429 refresh. Its page regression fails before the fix and passes after it. Eighty focused foundation tests, UI TypeScript, build and guards pass after that change. - Earlier CI evidence is retained: several foundation jobs received a runner shutdown signal together. The write-layer head also failed an unchanged Runner descriptor close test with `provider_transport_failed`. The same Runner source passed that suite in the foundation run. New CI runs cover the updated heads; no check or assertion was weakened. ## Risks - Shared retry defaults change the time before transient read errors appear. Permanent errors still fail promptly. - ApiError.message now contains readable copy. Callers that compare raw codes must use ApiError.code. - Cache success can come from another service or local data. It must not confirm Paperclip recovery. - Durable writes are reviewed separately in #17960. This PR does not change database or mutation contracts. ## Model Used Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`) produced the original work with tool use. OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, assisted with restoration, integration, tests and review fixes. The Codex session does not expose its exact serving 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: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Amy (Opus) <claude@users.noreply.github.com> |