2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	3b84c89885	fix(ci): use complete merge diffs and allow audited documentation (#18362) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and needs reliable checks for each contribution. > - CI selects affected suites and then affected Vitest files before allocating runners. > - Recent runs compared a tested merge against a stale event base. > - That included unrelated master changes and sometimes reached the compare API file cap. > - Ordinary documentation also forced every suite and invalidated test caches. > - This PR reads complete merge trees and exempts a small set of audited prose inputs. > - Tests retain conservative coverage when the diff or an input is uncertain. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18348 and #18214. This is a follow-up to the merged affected-test selector. Related CI performance work: #16513 and #16500 address setup and suite execution. This PR changes diff collection and input classification. ## What Changed - Fetch the exact tested merge and its parents into a temporary bare repository. Read the complete tree diff against the actual first parent. Validate the second parent against the event PR head. Never execute PR code in the routing job. - Carry the immutable base, merge and PR-head identities into the plan. Validate the same complete diff again before file selection. - Use one prose policy across the planner, Vitest selector and task cache adapter. Exempt only `doc/DEVELOPING.md`, `doc/DATABASE.md`, and Markdown under `doc/plans/`. - Keep the uncached typecheck and CLI guidance guard for the first two documents. Keep policy checks for historical plans. Keep existing coverage for all other docs, runtime skills, fixtures and unknown inputs. - Extend candidate-workflow qualification to exercise mixed source and prose changes. ## Verification - Passed: 15 planner and Git routing tests, including a 353-file diff, stale base, rename, deletion, wrong parent and fetch-failure cases. - Passed: 83 routing, Vitest graph, exact selection, workflow and real Turbo cache checks. - Passed: `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build`. - Full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and stopped after repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures in native-session and Muse tests. It did not pass or complete. The exact cause remains unverified. The changed files do not include those tests or their database setup. Linux CI results are recorded below. - Passed: real mixed Inbox/source/prose graph qualification selected 699/911 workspace test files, preserving the source-only selection. - Passed: both GitHub CI qualification jobs, including real mixed source/prose Vitest selection. Greptile reviewed commit `10ac6f5ec9` at 5/5 with no findings. - First full CI attempt: the [chat shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124253342684) received a runner shutdown signal. The [Runner shard](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124253341271) failed the unchanged Antigravity authentication success assertion. All 11 cases in that file passed when run directly. That Runner lane does not use the changed selector/cache path. The exact assertion-failure cause remains unverified. The chat shard passed on the one retry. The authentication assertion also passed on retry, but the same Runner shard failed a different unchanged test: `native-distribution-integrity.test.ts:242`, "retains spawned native bytes until the exact child exits", exceeded 5000ms. The [retry log](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41111003419/job/124259174201) preserves the failure. The Runner shard and required verify aggregate are still red; all other checks passed. All 33 native-distribution tests then passed in a direct local run. This shows recovery in isolation, not the cause of the Linux timeout. No further blind reruns were issued. - Replayed 15 real recent PR merge commits through a blob-filtered bare fetch. Nine needed a corrected base. The four API comparisons that returned 300 filenames became complete diffs of 3, 57, 66 and 54 files. The 3-file case (#18326) becomes eligible for graph selection. Most other samples still correctly use full CI because they include inputs outside this narrow prose policy. - Cache proof: prose edits preserve a product-test cache hit; changing runtime API documentation invalidates it. ## Risks - Prose exceptions must be removed or revised if product code starts reading those files. The allowlist is deliberately small. Runtime docs and skills remain covered. - A network or Git failure keeps the full-suite fallback. Unexpected merge topology also keeps full CI. Stack and force-full policies remain in place. - This does not claim an end-to-end speedup yet. Many mixed-content PRs still require full CI. The routing fetch reads only shallow commit/tree objects; it does not check out or execute PR files. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. The exact served model ID and context-window size are not exposed to 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 - [ ] 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>	2026-10-30 14:29:39 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	f5dcc505c0	perf(ci): select affected suites and cache task results (#18214) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Pull request CI checks the server, UI, packages, Runner, and release paths. > - An ordinary PR starts 48 jobs even when its diff affects only a small part of the repository. > - Repeated pushes also repeat successful tests with unchanged inputs. > - This PR selects affected suites before runner allocation and caches deterministic task results with Turbo. > - Required checks validate the plan. Unknown inputs and failed comparisons keep full verification. > - The benefit is fewer runner jobs and less repeated work, with full post-merge verification retained. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** The GitHub Actions PR workflow repeats unrelated suites for each push. **Subsystem affected** Cross-cutting CI routing, test execution, and required-check aggregation. **Current behavior** An ordinary UI component change starts the complete 48-job PR workflow. Existing dependency and compiler caches do not reuse successful test results. **Proposed behavior** A trusted planner reads the tested merge diff and task inputs. A UI component change such as `ui/src/components/Sidebar.tsx` selects 18 jobs, including build and browser coverage. Successful general, serialized, and standalone Rust tasks can reuse unchanged results across pushes in the same PR. **Reason and benefit** Reduce unrelated jobs and repeated test execution. The 48-to-18 comparison measures planned job count. Remote wall-clock savings have not yet been measured. **Breaking changes** No application API changes. Required `verify` and `e2e` names remain stable. `verify` also checks serialized suites and the canary dry run. ## What Changed - Added explicit task inputs and a pinned Turbo version. An execution adapter calls existing package scripts without adding script aliases. - Added trusted diff planning and dynamic matrices with complete fallback matrices. - Added PR-scoped task result caches. External-state and revision-stamped checks remain uncached. - Added and created the `full-ci` override label, plus repository modes `enabled`, `shadow`, and `full`. Forced and shadow runs bypass result caches. - Added candidate-workflow qualification, planner and aggregate tests, and a real Turbo cache fixture. - Kept the repository-wide CLI guidance guard in the uncached typecheck lane so UI-only diffs retain this security check. - Documented rollout controls, input maintenance, and local inspection commands. ## Verification - Passed 537 focused CI policy, routing, matrix, cache, and shard tests, plus 146 existing release workflow tests. - Passed actionlint for all four changed or added workflows and `git diff --check`. - Passed `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` on the implementation base. - Checked real repository task plans for existing general-test and native Rust commands. A real server partition passed, then restored from cache: Turbo task time was 20.022 seconds for execution and 151 ms for the cache hit, excluding wrapper/setup overhead. - The real Turbo fixture exercises the execution adapter and proves source, argument, toolchain-scope, and environment invalidation, result restoration, and retry of failed tasks. - Stopped the serial local `pnpm test:run` after over 30 minutes in favor of the complete parallel GitHub suite. A local parallel database-lane attempt had PostgreSQL startup errors and timeouts. The direct migration fixture passed, then all 273 database tests passed with one local worker. This recovery does not establish the exact cause of the earlier startup failures. The full GitHub PR suite and candidate qualification passed on commit `0bf07ae071c9fe7903edc604d44b5a175727fed0`. Greptile is 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - All 40 CLI guidance safety tests passed with the exact uncached workflow command. - Verified that master rulesets require only `ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`; both names remain unchanged. - Trusted workflows load from master. The added GitHub-hosted qualification workflow exercises this candidate planner before merge. ## Risks - Changes to global inputs, including task definitions and execution helpers, force execution and disable cache restore/save for the full PR diff. Missing a cross-package filesystem read could omit a suite. Inputs include known server reads of UI files and shared tests of UI assets. Unknown paths, malformed or truncated diffs, and definition download failures select all suites. - Task result reuse requires complete inputs. Keys include Git source files, scripts, resolved dependencies, environment, toolchain, checkout path, and unclassified source files. Generated build artifacts are excluded from input hashes. Registry smoke, browser, and revision-stamped tasks remain uncached. - Maintainers must update task inputs when suites start reading new paths. `shadow` reports selection while running all work. `full` and `full-ci` disable selection and result reuse. - The implementation becomes active after merge. Full post-merge verification remains unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, repository inspection, tool use, and code execution. The session does not expose a verifiable exact runtime 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-10-29 16:56:28 -05:00