mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 15:55:46 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
a3b34a9d88
## Thinking Path Paperclip lets a user queue a message while an agent works. The user must be able to remove that message before delivery starts. A new local message can clear the displayed queue ID until the server accepts it. This also disables trash for older saved messages. The page rejects the action before it sends a request. This change keeps trash available when the server says the user can discard the message. When the queue ID is absent, the page uses the existing comment cancellation route. The server finds the queue and checks the author and dispatch state in the same transaction. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Trash stays disabled for a saved queued message while another message waits for queue acknowledgement. The page handler also throws before it sends a cancellation request. **Expected behavior** Trash removes the selected queued message before dispatch. A message that has started dispatch stays visible with an error. Other queued messages stay queued. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Send a follow-up while an agent works. 2. Send another follow-up before the queue read includes it. 3. Try to discard the first saved message. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced from source at `0e3fdebea825`. **Deployment mode** Source checkout on Linux. UI tests use jsdom. Route tests use isolated embedded PostgreSQL. Related work: #15865 changes mixed-queue interrupt handling. #15939 changes recovery after a queued message is discarded. #15465 changes discard permissions for agent-authored entries. This change fixes trash for a user's own saved messages while queue acknowledgement is pending. ## What Changed - Keep trash enabled for a saved message with discard permission when the displayed queue ID is absent. - Use the existing author-only cancellation route when queue identity is pending. Keep the revision-checked route when queue identity is present. - Keep failed cancellations visible. Refresh the queue after cancellation and remove successful deletions from comment caches. - Cover deletion, dispatch conflicts, permission failures, network failures, history reloads, final-message cleanup, and concurrent dispatch. ## Verification - Red: three regression cases failed on the original production code. The trash button was disabled. Both page cases made no cancellation request. - Green: five complete UI suites pass, with 767 tests and one existing skipped test. These cover the page, queue component, thread, queue merge, and optimistic comments. - Green: 11 focused PostgreSQL route cases pass. They cover both routes, queue promotion, final-message cleanup, authorship, dispatch conflicts, and a concurrent dispatch claim. - `pnpm check:token-gates` and `git diff --check` pass. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` passes. - The GitHub tree is `d4f0d61cbef2620c1fd62e6988ad80ccb1ba6173`. It is identical to the tested local tree after merging master `902f3767960d`. - `pnpm verify` selected more than 1,500 server test files. That broad local run was stopped without a pass claim. CI will supply broad build and test coverage. The preflight helper could not build Rust because Cargo is absent. - [CI Build](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42835584447/job/129897150252) and [browser E2E](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42835584447/job/129901676175) pass for head `44dea22faea51a6664a6f45852a42f62f5c72bbd`. - [Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/20553#issuecomment-6770202777) gives the current head 5/5 with zero comments and no unresolved review threads. - [Final CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42835584447) passes for head `44dea22faea51a6664a6f45852a42f62f5c72bbd`: 55 check runs passed and 4 were skipped. No failures or pending checks remain. Typecheck, Build, all general test shards, serialized suites, Runner checks, and browser E2E passed. Snyk also passed. ## Risks The fallback has no client queue revision. The existing server transaction finds the queue for the selected comment and checks ownership and dispatch state. Tests cover rejection after dispatch and when another user owns the message. No API contract or schema changes are required. No visual tokens change. Existing user documentation remains accurate. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 in Codex. The runtime does not expose a more specific provider revision or context window size. Used reasoning, repository tools, code edits, and test execution. ## 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>