mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 10:48:12 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The pipeline subsystem models repeatable work as items moving through stages, with agent automation, review gates, blockers, drift notices, and linked work. > - Operators need this to be usable as one coherent workflow surface, not just as backend primitives or disconnected route experiments. > - The branch now carries the pipeline data model, service/routes, CLI/tutorial path, aggregation feeds, operator UI, stage automation controls, liveness/retry handling, and follow-up polish that make the primitive reviewable end to end. > - This pull request is the single review target for that pipeline workflow primitive stack. > - The benefit is that reviewers can evaluate the full operator experience and server contract together against `master`. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this work. The underlying feature request is described inline. ### Problem or motivation Paperclip needs a first-class way to model multi-stage agent/company workflows where upstream items can spawn downstream work, request review, carry fields across pipelines, surface drift, retry automation, and show operators where work is blocked or active. Without a unified pipeline primitive, these workflows spread across ad hoc issues, routines, and comments, making the state hard to inspect or operate. ### Proposed solution Add the pipeline workflow primitive stack: database schema and migrations, shared validators/types, server services and REST routes, aggregation and liveness helpers, CLI/tutorial smoke support, and the React operator UI for pipeline lists, boards, item detail, review/learnings views, settings, stage automation, secrets, carry-over fields, and retry/recovery flows. ### Alternatives considered - Keep workflows as loosely linked issues and routines: rejected because operators need a single board/detail/settings surface for repeated workflow patterns. - Ship backend primitives first and defer UI: rejected for this branch because the operator experience is the main way to validate the primitive. - Add a narrower one-off content workflow: rejected because the same primitives are useful across future company processes. ## What Changed - Added and evolved pipeline schema, migrations, shared contracts, server services, REST routes, route tests, and CLI/tutorial smoke support. - Added pipeline aggregation, health/liveness, drift acknowledgment, blocker/carry-over, automation retry, stage automation environment, and permission recovery behavior. - Added the operator UI for pipeline index/board/item detail/settings/review/learnings flows, including stage secrets, automation controls, markdown/item descriptions, linked issue assets, liveness banners, and source automation metadata. - Refactored issue document frame rendering through the shared `DocumentFrameHeader` component to keep document controls consistent with the pipeline document surfaces. - Kept this PR as the single base-branch review target for the current pipeline branch. ## Verification Current branch refresh: - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-service.test.ts` — 31 passed - `pnpm vitest run server/src/__tests__/pipelines-routes.test.ts` — 19 passed - `pnpm --filter ./server typecheck` — passed - `pnpm --filter ./ui typecheck` — passed - Verified Pipelines remains gated by `enablePipelines === true`: sidebar item is hidden unless the flag is enabled, direct pipeline routes redirect to `/dashboard` when disabled, and the Experimental settings UI still has no Pipelines toggle. - GitHub status checks on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` — all complete with no failing conclusions, including Actions, Socket, Superagent/Security, and Greptile Review - Greptile summary on `df071c710646de625131064c3fb6588b5e97964a` — Confidence Score 5/5 - GitHub review-thread sweep — 0 unresolved Greptile threads Previously recorded during branch development: - Server pipeline service/route and aggregation tests - Shared validator tests - UI pipeline page/settings/item-detail/learnings/liveness tests - Pipeline tutorial smoke path ## Risks - High review surface: this is a large feature branch spanning database, shared contracts, server behavior, CLI/docs, and UI. - Migration ordering and schema compatibility need reviewer attention because this branch has been kept current across multiple `master` syncs. - GitHub still reports merge state `BLOCKED` because the PR is awaiting normal human review/branch-protection completion; all current status checks are green. - Branch-name checklist exception: this PR uses the pre-existing requested branch name, which predates the current public-branch naming rule. The PR title/body avoid internal issue references. > 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 coding agent based on GPT-5, with repository tool use, shell execution, git/GitHub CLI operations, and local verification commands. Earlier commits in this branch were assisted by Paperclip agents and other AI coding agents as recorded in commit authorship. ## 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) - [ ] 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>
146 lines
4.8 KiB
TypeScript
146 lines
4.8 KiB
TypeScript
import type { QueryClient } from "@tanstack/react-query";
|
|
import type { Issue } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
import { issuesApi } from "@/api/issues";
|
|
import { queryKeys } from "@/lib/queryKeys";
|
|
|
|
const ISSUE_DETAIL_QUERY_PREFIX = ["issues", "detail"] as const;
|
|
export const ISSUE_DETAIL_STALE_TIME_MS = 60_000;
|
|
|
|
function isNonEmptyString(value: unknown): value is string {
|
|
return typeof value === "string" && value.length > 0;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function collectIssueRefs(
|
|
issueRef: string | null | undefined,
|
|
issue?: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier"> | null,
|
|
): string[] {
|
|
const refs = new Set<string>();
|
|
if (isNonEmptyString(issueRef)) refs.add(issueRef);
|
|
if (isNonEmptyString(issue?.id)) refs.add(issue.id);
|
|
if (isNonEmptyString(issue?.identifier)) refs.add(issue.identifier);
|
|
return Array.from(refs);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function matchesIssueRef(issue: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier">, refs: Iterable<string>) {
|
|
const refSet = refs instanceof Set ? refs : new Set(refs);
|
|
return refSet.has(issue.id) || (!!issue.identifier && refSet.has(issue.identifier));
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function isCompleteIssueSnapshot(value: unknown): value is Issue {
|
|
if (typeof value !== "object" || value === null) return false;
|
|
const issue = value as Partial<Issue>;
|
|
return (
|
|
isNonEmptyString(issue.id)
|
|
&& isNonEmptyString(issue.companyId)
|
|
&& typeof issue.title === "string"
|
|
&& typeof issue.status === "string"
|
|
&& typeof issue.workMode === "string"
|
|
&& typeof issue.priority === "string"
|
|
&& (issue.projectId === null || typeof issue.projectId === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.parentId === null || typeof issue.parentId === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.identifier === null || typeof issue.identifier === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.description === null || typeof issue.description === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.assigneeAgentId === null || typeof issue.assigneeAgentId === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.assigneeUserId === null || typeof issue.assigneeUserId === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.executionRunId === null || typeof issue.executionRunId === "string")
|
|
&& (issue.issueNumber === null || typeof issue.issueNumber === "number")
|
|
&& typeof issue.requestDepth === "number"
|
|
&& issue.createdAt != null
|
|
&& issue.updatedAt != null
|
|
);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
function mergeIssueSnapshots(existing: Issue | undefined, incoming: Issue): Issue {
|
|
if (!existing) return incoming;
|
|
return {
|
|
...existing,
|
|
...incoming,
|
|
};
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function getIssueDetailCacheRefs(issue: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier">): string[] {
|
|
return collectIssueRefs(null, issue);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function getCachedIssueDetail(
|
|
queryClient: QueryClient,
|
|
issueRef: string | null | undefined,
|
|
issue?: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier"> | null,
|
|
): Issue | undefined {
|
|
const refs = collectIssueRefs(issueRef, issue);
|
|
|
|
for (const ref of refs) {
|
|
const cached = queryClient.getQueryData<Issue>(queryKeys.issues.detail(ref));
|
|
if (isCompleteIssueSnapshot(cached)) return cached;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const cachedEntries = queryClient.getQueriesData<Issue>({ queryKey: ISSUE_DETAIL_QUERY_PREFIX });
|
|
return cachedEntries
|
|
.map(([, cachedIssue]) => cachedIssue)
|
|
.find((cachedIssue): cachedIssue is Issue =>
|
|
isCompleteIssueSnapshot(cachedIssue) && matchesIssueRef(cachedIssue, refs)
|
|
);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function seedIssueDetailCache(
|
|
queryClient: QueryClient,
|
|
issue: Issue,
|
|
options?: {
|
|
issueRef?: string | null;
|
|
},
|
|
): Issue {
|
|
if (!isCompleteIssueSnapshot(issue)) return issue;
|
|
|
|
const refs = collectIssueRefs(options?.issueRef, issue);
|
|
const merged = mergeIssueSnapshots(getCachedIssueDetail(queryClient, options?.issueRef, issue), issue);
|
|
|
|
for (const ref of refs) {
|
|
queryClient.setQueryData<Issue>(
|
|
queryKeys.issues.detail(ref),
|
|
(existing) => mergeIssueSnapshots(existing, merged),
|
|
);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return merged;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export async function fetchIssueDetail(
|
|
queryClient: QueryClient,
|
|
issueRef: string,
|
|
): Promise<Issue> {
|
|
const issue = await issuesApi.get(issueRef);
|
|
return seedIssueDetailCache(queryClient, issue, { issueRef });
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function getIssueDetailQueryOptions(
|
|
queryClient: QueryClient,
|
|
issueRef: string,
|
|
options?: {
|
|
placeholderIssue?: Pick<Issue, "id" | "identifier"> | null;
|
|
},
|
|
) {
|
|
return {
|
|
queryKey: queryKeys.issues.detail(issueRef),
|
|
queryFn: () => fetchIssueDetail(queryClient, issueRef),
|
|
placeholderData: getCachedIssueDetail(queryClient, issueRef, options?.placeholderIssue ?? undefined),
|
|
};
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
export function prefetchIssueDetail(
|
|
queryClient: QueryClient,
|
|
issueRef: string,
|
|
options?: {
|
|
issue?: Issue | null;
|
|
},
|
|
) {
|
|
if (isCompleteIssueSnapshot(options?.issue)) {
|
|
seedIssueDetailCache(queryClient, options.issue, { issueRef });
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return queryClient.prefetchQuery({
|
|
queryKey: queryKeys.issues.detail(issueRef),
|
|
queryFn: () => fetchIssueDetail(queryClient, issueRef),
|
|
staleTime: ISSUE_DETAIL_STALE_TIME_MS,
|
|
});
|
|
}
|