2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	ffff1fe6e3	feat(runner): define package API and verification boundary (#12129) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The runner package now has protocol, transport, provider, catalog, and authorization foundations. > - Its first upstream package boundary should expose only the implemented runtime and test-helper surfaces. > - Rust correctness belongs in the repository existing build verification, without introducing a parallel release process. > - Direct package creation must build the files declared by the package manifest. > - This pull request defines the minimal package API and verifies the optimized runner binaries in the existing PR and release Build jobs. > - The benefit is a production-ready runner package boundary with minimal build-process change. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #11962 This pull request replaces one bounded part of the archived large runner change. It follows the package-local authorization change in #12126. ## What Changed - Export only `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner` and `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner/testing`. - Keep Node-only fixture loading and semantic conformance helpers out of the runtime root. - Add a provider-neutral semantic conformance kit with stable JSON comparison and fail-closed input checks. - Keep deferred SDK, eval, browser, React, lab, and command surfaces private. - Pin the runner Rust toolchain to 1.97.1 with the minimal profile and `rustfmt`. - Run the Rust workspace tests in release mode. - Launch the optimized `paperclip-runnerd` and fake-harness binaries in process-level integration coverage. - Add one `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all` step to each existing PR and release Build job. - Make the existing server `prepack` lifecycle run its existing build after it prepares UI assets. - Document that no production adapter starts runnerd yet. This revision adds no standalone GitHub Actions job. It adds no server runner dependency or runner vendoring. It adds no Docker bootstrap or clean-consumer harness. It does not change `pnpm-lock.yaml`. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/paperclip-runner check:all` - 66 TypeScript tests - 8 protocol contract tests - 56 Rust unit and integration tests - Release-mode integration coverage launches the optimized runnerd and fake-harness binaries. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts` (2 tests) - Clean `pnpm pack` from `server/` rebuilt the server and produced both `package/dist/index.js` and `package/dist/index.d.ts`. - `node --test scripts/__tests__/release-verify-workflow.test.mjs` (8 tests) - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm check:token-gates` - `git diff --check` - No `pnpm-lock.yaml` diff. - The diff changes 12 files. ## Risks The runner adds Rust work to the existing Build jobs. These jobs can take longer on a cold cache. The pinned toolchain makes contributor and CI behavior reproducible. Cargo tests use `--release` to verify optimized executables. The server prepack lifecycle now performs the build that its published entry points require. This can make direct server packing slower. This pull request does not wire runnerd into the server. It does not select runnerd for any adapter. Existing application execution and finalization paths remain unchanged. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex with GPT-5. Agentic coding mode used repository tools, code execution, and automated tests. ## 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>	2026-08-25 09:31:48 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	d166069bc4	Preserve built-in agent assets in server builds (#9339) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server package ships compiled runtime code plus static runtime assets. > - Built-in agent definitions live under `server/src/built-ins` and runtime code resolves them relative to compiled server files. > - The server build already copied onboarding assets into `dist`, but it did not copy built-in agent assets alongside the compiled code. > - Packaged server builds could therefore miss built-in agent definitions even though source-based development runs worked. > - This pull request extends the server build copy step to preserve built-in agent assets in `dist/built-ins`. > - The benefit is packaged server builds keep the same built-in agent runtime assets available as source-based development runs. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue found. This PR describes the underlying bug inline using the bug report template fields. ### What happened? `@paperclipai/server` build output copied `server/src/onboarding-assets` into `server/dist/onboarding-assets`, but did not copy `server/src/built-ins` into `server/dist/built-ins`. Runtime code for built-in agents resolves those assets relative to the compiled server files, so packaged builds could omit built-in agent markdown assets that are present during source-based development. ### Expected behavior Packaged server builds should include built-in agent assets under `server/dist/built-ins`, matching the runtime location expected by the compiled server code. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Check out current `master` before this PR. 2. Run `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`. 3. Check for `server/dist/built-ins/agents/reflection-coach/AGENTS.md`. 4. Observe that the built-in agent asset is missing from the server build output. ### Paperclip version or commit Reproduces on current `master` before this PR. The fix is verified on commit `2b89984ccb7857f06359bf65c48222f110c7aeff`. ### Deployment mode Build/package artifact behavior. This can affect any deployment mode that runs from the built server package rather than directly from source. ### Installation method Built from source with `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build`. ### Agent adapter(s) involved Not adapter-specific. This is a core server packaging bug for built-in agent assets. ### Database mode Not database-related. ### Access context Not applicable. This happens during package build output generation. Related search: - Searched public PRs/issues for `built-ins build copy repo:paperclipai/paperclip`. - Found no directly related open issue. One old closed Hermes adapter PR was not directly related. ## What Changed - Updated the `@paperclipai/server` build script to create `dist/built-ins`. - Added the copy step from `server/src/built-ins` into `server/dist/built-ins` alongside the existing onboarding asset copy. - Added a focused server package build-script test that asserts both onboarding and built-in static runtime asset directories are copied into `dist`. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/server-package-build-script.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server build` - `test -f server/dist/built-ins/agents/reflection-coach/AGENTS.md` ## Risks Low risk. This changes only the package build asset copy step and adds focused test coverage. The main risk is build-script portability, but it follows the existing `mkdir -p` and `cp -R` pattern already used for onboarding assets. > 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 in a tool-enabled Paperclip heartbeat. Exact model ID and context-window size are 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: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>	2026-07-10 07:44:08 -05:00