mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-11 05:31:46 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The release system publishes the server package with selected runtime dependencies inside its tarball. > - The staging step writes a temporary package manifest before it runs npm install. > - That manifest kept private development dependencies that npm still tried to resolve with `--omit=dev`. > - The canary release then stopped because the matching private runner version was not published yet. > - This pull request removes development dependencies from only the temporary install manifest. > - The benefit is that bundled package staging installs only the runtime dependencies that the tarball includes. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #12582 **What happened?** The canary release failed while it prepared `@paperclipai/server`. npm tried to resolve `@paperclipai/paperclip-runner@2026.831.0-canary.8` from the temporary staging manifest. The runner package was not published at that version, so npm returned `ETARGET`. See the [failed release job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/33395418107/job/99504474818). **Expected behavior** Bundled package staging must install only dependencies that the published tarball bundles. Private development dependencies must not affect the staging install. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a bundled package with a public bundled runtime dependency. 2. Add an unpublished package version to `devDependencies`. 3. Run `scripts/prepare-bundled-package.mjs`. 4. Observe that npm resolves the development dependency even when the command uses `--omit=dev`. **Paperclip version or commit** `5a988df600ebda30e446496862bf83c76d6d53d6` ## What Changed - Remove `devDependencies` from the temporary manifest used for bundled package installation. - Keep the final publish manifest unchanged. - Add unit and staging regression checks for the unpublished development dependency case. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` - `node --test scripts/acpx-patch-packaging.test.mjs` (12 passed) - `pnpm test:release-registry` (98 passed) - `git diff --check` - The full test suite and build were not run. This change has focused release-packaging coverage. ## Risks - Low risk. The change affects only the temporary manifest used to install bundled runtime dependencies. - The script restores the complete publish manifest before it creates the package tarball. > 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 with `gpt-5.6-sol`. The model used agentic reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The context window size is not exposed in this environment. ## 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>