mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-21 00:05:49 +02:00
ea4aa185b0f3bc30be1c5fc160cdfd0eb433fe41
8
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
21ee5c9c85 |
feat(sentry): add opt-in run failure reporting with saved run references (#16300)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent runs retain execution results and output in the instance. > - Operators can report run failures to Sentry for investigation. > - A backend Sentry DSN currently enables those reports with no separate choice. > - A repair bot also needs the exact instance, company, agent, and saved run. > - This pull request adds an explicit reporting mode and authenticated run references. > - The benefit is that operators can investigate every failure on selected deployments while keeping other deployments quiet. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Optional server reporting of terminal agent run failures to Sentry. **Current behavior** A backend DSN enables run failure reports. Known account, quota, and connection failures are excluded. Reports omit company and agent references. Runs without a task are skipped. Tool-name collision errors omit the conflicting bindings. **Proposed behavior** Set `PAPERCLIP_SENTRY_RUN_FAILURES=unexpected` to retain the existing filters. Set it to `all` to report every failed or timed-out run, including known setup and quota failures. The default is `off`. Expected stops stay excluded. Each report supplies identifiers and API paths that a bot can use with its own authorized Paperclip connection. **Reason and benefit** Operators can enable broad failure reporting on one staging deployment. A bot can fetch the saved run, events, and logs instead of relying on a short error label or copying complete transcripts into Sentry. **Breaking changes** A backend DSN alone no longer enables run failure reports. Existing operators must set `PAPERCLIP_SENTRY_RUN_FAILURES=unexpected` to retain the previous policy. Ordinary server exception capture remains enabled by the DSN. Failure grouping gains the phase and original cause code when available. Refs #16281, #16297, #16298. These cover related tool discovery and failure diagnostics. This change retains their existing boundaries and does not depend on their open changes. ## What Changed - Add `off`, `unexpected`, and `all` modes. Missing and invalid values keep reporting off before diagnostic reads. - Keep the Sentry backend DSN and audited optional SDK requirements. - Include company, agent, run, and optional task identifiers. Include versioned paths for the saved run, events, log, and task. Add absolute run URLs only for a valid public HTTP(S) origin. - Report company runs without a task. Prefer the first-class issue binding when selecting the task reference. - Select saved native provider/model settings, timestamps, and original failure codes. Preserve gateway reason codes through redacted exception projection. - Group by error code, adapter, and available phase/cause. Keep run IDs and error text out of grouping. - Include the tool names and connection bindings in collision errors without copying tool schemas or provider metadata. - Document configuration, upgrade behavior, bot access, redaction, retention, and best-effort delivery. ## Verification - All 56 checks passed for `cccb47a721eaa1cc36e63278fc177b9101477541`. Two unrelated Storybook jobs were skipped by their path filters. No checks remain pending. - Complete [Paperclip CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38591422284): passed. This covers general and serialized tests, Runner checks, browser E2E shards, typecheck, build, release-registry checks, canary dry run, and Docker checks. - Greptile reviewed that exact head: 5/5, with no unresolved threads or actionable findings. Superagent, Socket, and Snyk checks passed. - Local focused reporting, diagnostics, collision, and real SDK contract tests: 410 passed across five suites. This includes the external-wake filter in both reporting modes. - The audited `@sentry/node@10.71.0` tests use an in-memory transport. No events were sent to Sentry. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`: passed locally after the final rebase. - `node scripts/check-module-boundaries.mjs` and `git diff --check`: passed. - The full local `pnpm test:run` command was stopped to avoid duplicating the complete CI shards. It did not finish locally. The full suite passed in CI. ## Risks - The new default disables existing run failure exports until the operator selects a mode. The upgrade setting is documented. - `all` can increase event volume and include known user-action failures. Secret redaction and diagnostic limits still apply. - Reporting remains asynchronous and best effort. This PR adds no durable delivery queue and does not install a bot or Sentry alert rule. - API references grant no authority. Existing company, private-task, and run-output checks still apply. Complete transcripts stay in Paperclip. - This changes optional Sentry error reporting. It changes neither first-party Telemetry nor OpenTelemetry span exports. It adds no database migration. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell, file editing, and test execution. The exact backend deployment ID and context window 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
|
9dd6526b47 |
fix(security): harden privileged server boundaries (#12776)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The server controls secrets, host files, outbound requests, and workspace commands > - A red-team review found cases where restricted callers could cross these trust boundaries > - These cases could expose credentials or let untrusted input reach privileged resources > - This pull request applies least-privilege checks at each affected server boundary > - The benefit is safer agent execution without changing the private-instance bootstrap contract ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Several server paths used authorization, redaction, or content-delivery rules that were too broad. Restricted agent keys could obtain company-level operational data. Some adapter and instruction paths could reach server-owned network or file resources without the required owner approval. **Expected behavior** Paperclip must redact credential values, enforce restricted-key scopes, guard outbound network access, prevent same-origin script execution, and reserve host-level file and command controls for authorized operators. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Configure an authenticated development instance at the parent commit. 2. Exercise the affected APIs with a restricted agent key or a non-instance-admin company user. 3. Observe that the parent commit returns privileged data or accepts a privileged operation. 4. Repeat on this branch and observe a redacted response, a safe download, or an HTTP 403 response. **Paperclip version or commit** The findings reproduce from commit `39898ab22` and are fixed by this pull request. **Deployment mode** Authenticated self-hosted server and local development modes. **Installation method** Built from source with pnpm. ## What Changed - Redact generic secret `value` and `token` fields recursively in structured logs. - Classify exact and separator-suffixed `KEY` environment names as secrets in company exports. - Limit restricted self-identity responses and protect company run, log, and secret catalog APIs. - Route HTTP adapter requests through DNS-pinned SSRF protection with exact private-origin allowlisting. - Download HTML, SVG, and other script-capable assets with `nosniff` and a sandbox CSP. - Require instance-admin access for external instruction roots and exports that read them. - Block agent-authenticated host command persistence across supported workspace runtime shapes. - Apply the central runtime-management decision before workspace command controls. - Keep the documented first-user instance-admin claim contract unchanged. - Add regression tests and server-owner configuration documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passes. - The Node 24 remediation suite passes with 365 tests. It skips 25 environment-gated tests. - `pnpm build` passes under Node 24. - `git diff --check` passes. - The full local runner reaches known macOS-only general-server harness failures before the serialized route lane. The Linux PR matrix is the authoritative full-suite gate. ## Risks - Restricted agent keys now receive HTTP 403 responses from company-wide run, log, and secret catalog endpoints. - Script-capable assets now download instead of rendering inline. - External instruction roots now require instance-admin access. - Private HTTP adapter endpoints now require an exact origin in `PAPERCLIP_HTTP_ADAPTER_PRIVATE_ENDPOINT_ALLOWLIST`. - Public HTTP adapter endpoints remain enabled. Redirects and metadata or link-local targets remain blocked. - No database migration is required. > 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. The exact serving snapshot and context-window size are not exposed. The model used tool-enabled reasoning, repository access, code execution, and 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 - [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
|
6244e4cf32 |
feat(apps): add Composio and Gmail connectors (#12342)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - App connections need both direct providers and managed provider hubs. > - The grant layer now defines safe credential ownership. > - Composio needs parent and child connection lifecycle rules, and Gmail needs governed setup. > - This pull request adds both connector families on the grant foundation. > - The benefit is broader app access without weakening credential isolation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11965 This is stack 4 of 11. It depends on stack 3 and replaces another reviewable part of #11965. ## What Changed - Add Composio parent and child connection support. - Add Gmail connection setup and governance. - Preserve credential paths and remove duplicate binding declarations. - Cascade Composio pause and restore actions to child connections. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` - Result: 164 tests passed. - `pnpm build` ## Risks - Parent lifecycle changes can affect every Composio child. - The service restores only children whose provider accounts remain active. - Credential binding paths are normalized before secret resolution. > I checked `ROADMAP.md`. This stack continues the existing app connection work from #11965 and does not duplicate another planned item. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5. The runtime model ID and context window were not exposed. The model used reasoning, tool use, and code 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 - [x] My branch name describes the change 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
|
8087661bb8 |
fix: bound workspace Git scans (#11572)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Workspaces let users and agents inspect files that belong to an issue > - Changed-file views use full-tree Git status scans > - Many issue views could start those scans at the same time and make the server unresponsive > - Route-level limits did not protect the process or coalesce work for one repository > - This pull request adds one bounded scheduler for every expensive workspace Git scan > - It also starts browser scans only when the file panel is open and visible > - The benefit is bounded child-process use and responsive health checks during request storms ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Many changed-file requests could start full `git status --porcelain=v1 -z --untracked-files=all` scans at the same time. One production incident produced about 270 direct Git child processes. The Node process stayed alive but stopped answering health requests in time. **Expected behavior** Paperclip must bound expensive Git work across all companies, actors, issues, repositories, and browser tabs. Duplicate requests for one worktree must share work. Excess requests must fail fast with a retryable response. Hidden or closed file panels must not start scans. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open changed-file views for many issue and actor keys. 2. Send requests for two large workspace roots at the same time. 3. Observe that route-level limiter keys allow many full Git scans to run together. 4. Observe delayed health responses and accumulated Git children. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master before commit `43ab441f0f`. **Deployment mode** Self-hosted server with local workspace repositories. ## What Changed - Add a process-wide scheduler with configurable concurrency, queue capacity, timeout, and cache TTL. - Add fair admission, a bounded queue, canonical worktree keys, single-flight joins, and bounded result caching. - Add subprocess timeouts, TERM-to-KILL escalation, bounded output, waiter cancellation, and slot cleanup. - Route full-tree status work from file resources, workspace runtime, execution workspaces, and adapter overlay sync through the scheduler. - Return stable retryable `503` and `504` error codes for saturation and timeout. - Add structured logs with safe workspace hashes, durations, queue state, cache use, joins, and terminal outcomes. - Gate UI queries on panel and document visibility. Cancel queries on close, hide, unmount, and workspace change. - Disable focus and reconnect bursts. Keep one explicit refresh action and a retryable unavailable state. - Document the 10-second default freshness tradeoff and all configuration variables. - Add unit, route, UI, adapter, and deterministic 500-request load coverage. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/workspace-git-operation-scheduler.test.ts src/__tests__/file-resources-git-scan-load.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 16 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/components/WorkspaceFileBrowser.test.tsx src/lib/page-visibility.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 38 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run src/git-workspace-sync.test.ts --reporter=dot` — 16 tests passed. - Existing file-resource, workspace-runtime, and execution-workspace regression selections passed. - Two cleanup safety regressions prove failed scans preserve the worktree before archive and at the final deletion fence. - Before: the incident produced about 270 Git children and health requests timed out. - After: 500 concurrent requests across 500 issue keys, 73 actors, and two roots started two underlying scans. Peak scan concurrency was 2. All 500 requests succeeded. Health p99 was 4.94 ms. The harness found zero unreaped children. - The full local Vitest run passed 4,267 tests. Ten existing fixed-port HTTPS exposure tests could not run because this host already owns Tailnet listeners on ports 42000 and 52000. Clean GitHub CI is the final full-suite result. - Latest-head GitHub CI passed all required test, typecheck, build, canary, e2e, policy, and security gates. - Greptile completed at 5/5 with zero unresolved comments, recommendations, or follow-ups. ## Risks - Changed-file results can be up to 10 seconds old by default. Explicit refresh remains available. - A full queue returns a retryable `503` instead of waiting without a bound. - A scan that exceeds the default 8-second deadline returns a retryable `504` and terminates its process group. - Operators can tune all limits with documented environment variables. Safe defaults protect local and shared servers. > 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 family. The runtime does not expose the exact deployment ID or context-window size. High reasoning, tool use, and code execution 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> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
9c8adee48b |
feat(mcp) [split 5/8]: integrate adapters and deployment runtime (#9560)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Governed MCP access spans contracts, runtime enforcement, adapters, UI surfaces, and operator verification > - The parity reference PR #9534 is too large for effective automated or human review > - The feature therefore needs a linear stack whose individual diffs stay below the 100-file review limit > - This pull request is split 5/8 and focuses on remaining adapters, CLI, plugin examples, and deployment packaging > - The benefit is a standalone, testable review boundary while preserving byte-for-byte parity at the top of the stack ## Linked Issues or Issue Description - Related parity reference: #9534 - Problem: The backend runtime needs packaging, CLI propagation, worktree provisioning, release manifests, and remaining adapter/plugin consumers. - Proposed solution: Adds the remaining runtime/deployment integration after compile-required contracts and concrete MCP injection moved into lower server levels. - Alternatives considered: keeping #9534 as one 403-file review, or rewriting the feature to manufacture seams; both were rejected in favor of path extraction plus compile-driven boundary moves. - Roadmap alignment: this advances the existing governed MCP/tool-access work already represented by #9534; it does not introduce a separate roadmap initiative. - Stack position: base branch is `pap10341-split/04-server-runtime-wiring`. - Merge policy: merge bottom-up, in order, only after the complete eight-PR stack has been reviewed and the top-of-stack parity gate remains empty. - Requested review: QA for CLI, packaging, and worktree behavior; Greptile on every PR. ## What Changed - Adds the remaining runtime/deployment integration after compile-required contracts and concrete MCP injection moved into lower server levels. - Keeps this PR below 100 changed files and independently typecheckable. - Preserves the final tree from #9534 when combined with the other seven stack levels. ## Verification - `pnpm typecheck` - Focused CLI Vitest run — 4 files, 49 tests passed ## Risks - Packaging omissions could make the feature work in source but fail in Docker, worktrees, or release assembly. - Stack risk: merging out of order can expose incomplete layers; mitigate by following the documented bottom-up merge policy. - Parity risk: later edits to an intermediate branch can drift from #9534; mitigate by re-running the empty top-of-stack diff before merge. > 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, exact model ID `gpt-5.4`; runtime-managed context window; medium reasoning with repository, shell, Git, GitHub CLI, and code-execution tools 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] Internal references are omitted except the execution-plan link explicitly required for this coordinated split stack - [x] My branch name describes the change 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 ## Stack Coordination - Internal execution plan: [PAP-13874](/PAP/issues/PAP-13874#document-plan) - Parity reference: #9534 - Stack: #9556 → #9557 → #9558 → #9559 → #9560 → #9561 → #9562 → #9563 - Merge bottom-up only after full-stack review and an empty parity diff at #9563. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
e89d3f7e11 |
[codex] Add backup endpoint and dev runtime hardening (#4087)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is a local-first control plane for AI-agent companies. > - Operators need predictable local dev behavior, recoverable instance data, and scripts that do not churn the running app. > - Several accumulated changes improve backup streaming, dev-server health, static UI caching/logging, diagnostic-file ignores, and instance isolation. > - These are operational improvements that can land independently from product UI work. > - This pull request groups the dev-infra and backup changes from the split branch into one standalone branch. > - The benefit is safer local operation, easier manual backups, less noisy dev output, and less cross-instance auth leakage. ## What Changed - Added a manual instance database backup endpoint and route tests. - Streamed backup/restore handling to avoid materializing large payloads at once. - Reduced dev static UI log/cache churn and ignored Node diagnostic report captures. - Added guarded dev auto-restart health polling coverage. - Preserved worktree config during provisioning and scoped auth cookies by instance. - Added a Discord daily digest helper script and environment documentation. - Hardened adapter-route and startup feedback export tests around the changed infrastructure. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/db/src/backup-lib.test.ts server/src/__tests__/instance-database-backups-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/server-startup-feedback-export.test.ts server/src/__tests__/adapter-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/dev-runner-paths.test.ts server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts server/src/__tests__/http-log-policy.test.ts server/src/__tests__/vite-html-renderer.test.ts server/src/__tests__/workspace-runtime.test.ts server/src/__tests__/better-auth.test.ts` - Split integration check: merged after the runtime/governance branch and before UI branches with no merge conflicts. - Confirmed this branch does not include `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Risks - Medium risk: touches server startup, backup streaming, auth cookie naming, dev health checks, and worktree provisioning. - Backup endpoint behavior depends on existing board/admin access controls and database backup helpers. - No database migrations are included. > 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-5.4 tool-enabled coding model, agentic code-editing/runtime with local shell and GitHub CLI access; exact context window and reasoning mode are not exposed by the Paperclip harness. ## 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 - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Daniel Luca
|
b7a7dacfa3 | fix: remove hardcoded JWT secret fallback from createBetterAuthInstance | ||
|
ForgottenandClaude Opus 4.6
|
481b3a46db |
Add project scaffolding and infrastructure config
pnpm monorepo with shared packages, server, and UI workspaces. Includes Docker multi-stage build, Postgres compose, and root TypeScript/Vitest config. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> |