mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 10:48:12 +02:00
5207c78f21
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Releases are published by `release.yml`. A stable release promotes a soaked beta, and the stable notes live on master in `releases/beta/v<beta>.md` until the promotion runs. > - The curated notes for `2026.921.0-beta.1` have the title `Paperclip v2026.924.0` and the date `2026-09-24`. That stable did not ship. No `v2026.924.0` tag or release exists. > - The next promotion of this beta uses `stable_date=2026-10-01`. `scripts/release.sh stable --print-version --date 2026-10-01` resolves to `2026.1001.0`. > - `publish_stable` reads this file verbatim and uses it as the GitHub Release body. `canonicalize_stable_notes` copies it to `releases/v2026.1001.0.md`. Nothing rewrites the header. > - This pull request updates the title, the release date, and the intro sentence to `v2026.1001.0` and `2026-10-01`. > - The benefit is a GitHub Release page and a canonical notes file that show the correct version and date. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the documentation problem** The stable notes file `releases/beta/v2026.921.0-beta.1.md` names a stable version and release date that do not match the version the release workflow will publish. **Where is the problem** `releases/beta/v2026.921.0-beta.1.md`, lines 1, 3, and 5. **Proposed fix** Change `v2026.924.0` to `v2026.1001.0` and `2026-09-24` to `2026-10-01` in the three places that name the version or date. Change nothing else in the file. ## What Changed - Title: `# Paperclip v2026.924.0` → `# Paperclip v2026.1001.0` - Release date: `> Released: 2026-09-24` → `> Released: 2026-10-01` - Intro sentence: `Paperclip v2026.924.0 carries 77 commits` → `Paperclip v2026.1001.0 carries 77 commits` ## Verification - `git diff master --stat` shows one file with 3 insertions and 3 deletions. - `grep -n '924' releases/beta/v2026.921.0-beta.1.md` returns no lines. - `git show master:scripts/release.sh > /tmp/r.sh && bash /tmp/r.sh stable --print-version --date 2026-10-01` prints `2026.1001.0`. - The rest of the file is byte-identical to master. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a documentation-only change to a release notes file. No code or workflow changes. - If the stable promotion is dispatched with a different `stable_date`, the header must be updated again to match. ## Model Used - Claude Fable 5.1 (model ID `claude-fable-5-1`), run as a Paperclip agent through the Claude Agent SDK, with tool use (shell, git, GitHub CLI). No extended thinking mode was configured beyond the default. ## 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 - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable (not applicable: documentation-only change) - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>