mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
e8c8ba3c19c7e0fbd5ae138cb28684e283c04e36
2
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
6cfe4acff7 |
fix: preserve README images in npm package (#13488)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Its CLI is published as the paperclipai npm package, with the root README shown on the package page > - The root README uses repository-relative image paths so images render correctly on GitHub > - npm resolves those paths under the package repository directory, which is cli, so the image requests point to missing cli/doc/assets files > - This pull request prepares the generated npm README by converting only image src and srcset asset paths to stable raw GitHub URLs > - The benefit is that the same source README remains correct on GitHub and the published npm README displays its images ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Where is the issue?** The issue is in the root README image assets and the npm packaging step in scripts/build-npm.sh. The affected public page is https://www.npmjs.com/package/paperclipai. **What's wrong?** The npm build copies README.md into cli/ before publishing. npm resolves relative image paths beneath the package repository directory, so doc/assets/banner.jpg becomes cli/doc/assets/banner.jpg. Those files do not exist, and the images render as broken on npm. **Suggested fix** Keep the root README paths relative for GitHub. Rewrite repository-relative image paths only in the generated npm README copy to absolute raw.githubusercontent.com URLs. ## What Changed - Added a small npm README preparation script that rewrites relative image src and srcset asset paths. - Updated scripts/build-npm.sh to use the preparation step when generating the npm package README. - Added a regression test for src, srcset, immutable refs, absolute URLs, and non-image Markdown links. - Pinned release-build image URLs to the source commit, while preserving tarball builds by passing their known source refs. ## Verification - Passed: node --test scripts/prepare-npm-readme.test.mjs - Passed: bash -n scripts/build-npm.sh scripts/e2e-install-lifecycle.sh scripts/e2e-update-migrations.sh - Passed: focused README and E2E migration harness tests - Passed: git diff origin/master...HEAD --check - Generated README asset URLs were checked against raw GitHub and all seven returned HTTP 200. ## Risks Low risk. The change affects only the temporary README generated for npm packaging. It does not change the GitHub README or runtime code. The generated npm README depends on the public raw GitHub asset URLs remaining available. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. Tool-enabled repository inspection, code execution, browser verification, and git/GitHub operations were used. ## 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/... or 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 risks above - [ ] 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> |
||
|
|
c9116686bd |
test(installer): cover cross-version update migrations (#10587)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage AI-agent companies > - Managed updates can change both the application payload and its database schema > - Unit tests cannot prove that an older live install upgrades through a real migration and remains recoverable > - The managed-install work in #10045 needs a repeatable cross-version system test > - This pull request adds an isolated end-to-end harness for update, migration, backup, service restart, and rollback behavior > - The benefit is a direct proof that managed upgrades preserve the existing database and service lifecycle across versions ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10045 This test is a focused follow-up to the managed install integration. Merge #10045 first so the tested install, update, service, backup, and rollback commands are available. ## What Changed - Added a cross-version managed-update E2E script. - Installed an older Git ref, initialized its embedded PostgreSQL database, and updated to a ref with one additional migration. - Verified the pre-update backup, payload switch, service recovery, migration result, database-cluster reuse, and rollback behavior. - Isolated Paperclip state under a dedicated test home and cleaned up the service and managed install on success or failure. - Added regression tests for shell syntax, required-ref validation, side-effect-free preflight failure, and complete failure cleanup. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/e2e-update-migrations.test.mjs` - `bash -n scripts/e2e-update-migrations.sh` - GitHub latest-head CI: build, typecheck, release registry, canary dry-run, general tests, serialized suites, and both browser E2E shards passed. - Full harness execution needs an isolated macOS or Linux host with a real launchd or systemd user service. It is intentionally not run on a live Paperclip server host. ## Risks - The script manages a real user service and downloads two Git refs. Run it only on an isolated test host. - The test needs #10045 because `origin/master` does not yet contain the managed install lifecycle. - The script uses a dedicated `PAPERCLIP_HOME`, refuses a pre-existing shim or test home, and removes its service and install during cleanup. > 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 based on GPT-5. The runtime did not expose a more specific deployment ID or context-window size. Reasoning, repository access, shell execution, and GitHub tooling were 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 - [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> |