mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 17:51:58 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
5a07c30c1a
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agents and preserves their completed work. > - Native remote finalization must save workspace files before it releases the writer. > - Portable capture copied the working tree and Git history, repacked the history, and then wrote an archive. > - These temporary copies can exhaust a small sandbox after normal development work. > - A completed provider turn then fails finalization and file preservation repeats the same failure. > - This change streams checked working files and keeps only an independent Git copy in scratch. > - The save still rejects changed sources and incomplete output. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #18403 added portable remote workspace storage. #18172 handles disk pressure in Daytona directory transfer. This failure occurs earlier, while the portable archive helper creates its source archive. That earlier repair does not cover this path. **What happened?** A completed native run failed workspace finalization three times. Its file-preservation retries also failed. In a retained 10 GB Linux sandbox with about 1.5 GB free, the deployed helper failed during `git repack -a -d` with `Out of diskspace`. The working files used about 603 MB, and Git used about 444 MiB. **Expected behavior** Capture a coherent workspace when free space can hold one full archive plus an independent Git copy. Preserve working files, staged changes, unpushed commits, and existing recovery gates. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a disposable Linux sandbox with a Git repository and generated working files. 2. Leave enough free space for an archive and a Git copy, but not a second working tree and another repack. 3. Run the portable capture helper. The old helper fails while creating temporary data. 4. Run the fixed helper against the same source and free-space limit. Verify each archived file hash. The small regression uses real file serialization and a controlled filesystem capacity failure at archive creation. It failed with `ENOSPC` before the production edit and passes afterward. **Paperclip version or commit** The observed staging server served `42c64d4ec4b9b0898556fcdf6ba304c4285a7819`. The repair is based on `a92f616cd0`. **Deployment mode** Hosted staging. Linux x64, Node 25.9.0, Daytona sandbox. Local tests use a macOS source checkout. ## What Changed - Stream working files from checked file handles. Keep only normalized Git metadata in scratch. - Remove the second repack after a mirror clone that already uses `--dissociate` and `--no-hardlinks`. - Check each streamed file's hash, size, mode, and filesystem identity. Recheck the source inventory and Git state before returning a receipt. - Remove incomplete archives after failure or cancellation. Keep pre-existing archive files intact. - Add space-limit, concurrent-change, cancellation, and existing-file safety cases. Update execution semantics and workspace verification recipes. ## Verification - Red before the production change: the capacity regression failed with `ENOSPC`. Green afterward: 54 archive and transport tests pass. - The existing tests restore ordinary, linked, and borrowed Git repositories after their sources disappear. They retain staged, unstaged, and unpushed work. Credential and path guards also pass. - Live comparison on the same retained sandbox: the deployed helper failed after 19.4 seconds with Git disk exhaustion. The fixed helper completed in 35.3 seconds. It produced a 1,081,872,803-byte archive with 24,111 entries. An independent reader checked every archived file hash and the manifest digest. The source commit stayed unchanged. Diagnostic scratch was removed. - This live probe exercised the changed capture boundary. It did not deploy a server, upload a production snapshot, finalize the failed run, or replay its provider turn. Full task recovery still needs rollout and the normal export recovery path. - `node scripts/check-maps.mjs` and `git diff --check` pass. - Current-head CI passes: [PR workflow](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41499985180), commit `d42700f7f4b0bef14a5969a44c2da0b2513e0ed2`. Greptile rates the same head 5/5 with no actionable findings or unresolved threads. - The independent Ponytail advisory also rates this exact head 5/5 with no findings. Its structured check remains queued because the automatic request was bound to the earlier head. A [fresh current-head review request](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18644#issuecomment-6585296011) was accepted and queued. Its predecessor has a successful workspace export but remains active in finalization, so the new review cannot start yet. This review-service publication gate must complete before claiming every check is green. - `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass. The final server-only typecheck also passes after the test additions. - Supported-runtime verification on Node 24.11.0: all 54 archive/transport tests and all 46 existing workspace lifecycle tests pass. The lifecycle suite uses a disposable real Postgres database and local filesystem transport with encrypted snapshot storage. It checks save/restore after losing the original allocation, ownership, retention, and file continuity. This is separate from the live Daytona capture probe. - The first extra lifecycle attempt could not start its local Postgres binary because the installed Darwin package lacked library aliases. Local dependency setup was repaired before the passing run. No production or repository code changed for that setup. - The full local `pnpm test:run` on the host default Node 26.4.0 stops in chat-test collection with `No test found ... in lines ...`; it has no suite verdict. A clean retry repeats the failure. The unchanged `a92f616cd0` test wrapper reproduces it with the same installed dependencies, after correcting an initial baseline setup that lacked built package entries. This is a local test-runner limitation, not a full local pass. Current-head CI remains the full-suite gate. - One focused run timed out while deeply comparing 4 MB buffers under concurrent build load. Complete SHA-256 comparisons retain the content check without that assertion cost. The capacity case then passes in under one second, and the final 54-test run passes. The disk allowance and production code did not change. ## Risks - Streaming reads the live source instead of a copied working tree. File identity, content hashes, mode checks, the final inventory read, and Git signatures must reject concurrent changes. Regression tests exercise these checks. - Capture still needs space for the full archive and normalized Git metadata together. It cannot export from a completely full disk. - Archive framing and restore validation stay compatible. The change has no database migration or new execution authority. - The incident remains unrecovered until the fixed server performs normal workspace finalization. No deployment or merge is included in this PR. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository inspection, code editing, shell tools, browser diagnostics, and automated tests. The exact serving variant and context-window size 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>