mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 17:51:58 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
5955dd4eb4
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip saves remote agent work in committed workspace snapshots. > - Files can read that save after the writer finishes. > - Compute cleanup can clear the recorded location while a saved preview loads. > - The current fence treats that physical cleanup as a change to the saved bytes. > - Permit only that one-way location removal for an already verified saved copy. > - Keep all logical-authority checks and live-read fences. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #18677. This fixes the remaining in-flight cleanup race after saved reads began preferring the current committed version. A Files preview can return `422 workspace_changed` when allocation cleanup clears the location during archive loading. The epoch, committed snapshot, source, clean state, and absent writer can all remain unchanged. The extracted copy remains valid. An original QA denial recorded this error eight milliseconds after location cleanup. Its later successful read does not regrade the failed attempt. The original audit does not reconstruct the full earlier authority record. A controlled production-composed regression isolates the same cleanup transition. ## What Changed - Allow the recorded location to become null during a verified saved read while every other parsed authority field stays identical. - Remember observed removal so a reintroduced or foreign location still rejects the read. - Keep live reads, dirty state, active writers, changed epochs, snapshots, and sources fenced. - Add a real `createApp` content-route regression with PostgreSQL, encrypted archive storage, and private-copy cleanup. - Add negative controls for logical changes, foreign and reintroduced locations, and live location removal. - Update developer guidance and the workspace feature/access maps. ## Verification - Red: the production `createApp` route returned exactly `422 workspace_changed` when normal archive loading overlapped location removal. - Green: all 108 Files route and authorization tests passed. The preview returns the saved bytes, and its private extraction is removed. - All 46 opt-in workspace lifecycle tests passed on one owned local PostgreSQL database with local filesystem transport. The database and server were cleaned up. - `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm build`, `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`, and `git diff --check` passed. - [Current-head CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41550908692) completed successfully on `45517b474b6866de2de6c618b7ff2193c93038ac` (attempt 2). All PR gates are clean: 55 successes, 3 skips, and 1 neutral review result. The full suite ran in CI; it was not duplicated as a long local full-suite invocation. - [Original CI failure](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41550908692/job/125638034035) is retained: an unchanged mobile frame-sampling check collected 5 frames where more than 5 are required; all sampled geometry was identical. The exact unchanged local Chrome case passed, then one failed-job-only retry passed on the same source. No assertion or time budget changed. - Fresh exact-head Greptile review is 5/5 with no findings, inline comments, or unresolved threads. The separate Paperclip static review is also 5/5 with no actionable findings. - No deployed acceptance is claimed by these local tests. The original failed QA attempt remains failed. ## Risks This permits one specific transition for an immutable saved copy: the original recorded location can disappear. The company/workspace query, epoch, snapshot, source, dirty state, writer, and location-reintroduction checks remain. A live read still rejects physical location changes. The change does not release compute, change snapshot admission, or alter extraction limits. No schema or API-shape change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex with reasoning and code execution. The runtime does not expose a more specific model identifier or context-window size. ## 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>