mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-21 00:05:49 +02:00
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents for work. > - Chat channels turn external messages into shared task workflows. > - The main service still contains some provider decisions. > - These decisions belong with the existing channel modules. > - This pull request moves webhook recovery and payload-scope decisions to their provider modules. > - Shared authorization, persistence, and runtime ownership keep their current order. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #16235. Stack part 2/3. Base: `master`. #16276 is merged. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Provider ownership and readability in the chat channel service. **Current behavior** The entry point combines shared workflows with provider decisions. **Proposed behavior** Provider modules own their decisions. Shared modules own product state and authorization. **Reason and benefit** Maintainers can find provider behavior in its channel folder. **Breaking changes** None intended. Public service methods and durable data shapes stay compatible. ## What Changed - Move GitHub revoked-installation recovery classification to `github/webhook-scope.ts`. - Move Teams payload-scope validation to its message module. - Record normalized GitHub, Telegram, and Teams lifecycle events through one shared durable call. - Keep Slack callback ordering and persistence failures outside parser catches. - Reduce `chat-channels.ts` from 3,598 to 3,570 lines. ## Verification - The same 86 selected webhook/lifecycle integration cases passed before and after in an owned Linux container. - The same 17 selected Telegram edit and Teams edit/delete/restore cases passed before and after in that container. - The same 94 SDK adapter and lifecycle-normalization tests passed locally before and after. - Server typecheck and module-boundary checks passed. - Token comparison confirms the shared recording payload and runtime fence, plus the Teams scope and parser inputs. - The host database baseline failed before assertions because System V shared-memory IDs were exhausted. No other PostgreSQL server or host setting was changed. Database verification used an isolated container under its unprivileged user. - The extraction rebased without conflicts after #16276 merged. Git range-diff reports the same patch. The 94 SDK/lifecycle tests and server typecheck passed on this base. All CI gates pass on rebased head `d835d7c3815c168226fa646aec6370b6a8ac94c1`. Greptile reviewed that exact head at 5/5, with no inline findings or unresolved review threads. - Cumulative `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` passed. All 1,321 channel integration cases passed. The normal UI, CLI, database, adapter, plugin, and serialized API test selections ran. - The first Linux `pnpm test:run` returned 1. Original-source runs reproduced the local failures. Container-only repairs supplied missing tools, process reaping, and sufficient Node heap. The existing mocked-fetch CLI telemetry fixture passed with the image opt-out flag overridden only for that fixture. - One local venue limitation remains: adapter-utils T24 fails unchanged on both original and final source in the Linux container. Its entire 56-case suite passes before and after on the host. All other failed or aborted suites passed in repaired reruns. No test assertion or timeout changed. - These fixtures exercise application state and the service entry point. They do not prove live provider execution. ## Risks - A scope or ordering error could record an event for the wrong provider context. - The selected parser returns normalized data. The shared service keeps durable recording and runtime fencing. - No database migration or API change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, running in Codex with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact deployment identifier 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>
70 lines
2.8 KiB
TypeScript
70 lines
2.8 KiB
TypeScript
import type { EndpointRow, LifecycleRuntimeFence } from "../runtime-types.js";
|
|
import type { ChatSdkProvider } from "../../chat-sdk-runtime.js";
|
|
export type GitHubIngressContext = { githubIngressActionId: string; githubIngressFence: LifecycleRuntimeFence; superseded?: boolean };
|
|
export function createGitHubWebhookScope(provider: ChatSdkProvider, internalContext: GitHubIngressContext | undefined, responseBudgetMs: number | undefined, GITHUB_WEBHOOK_RESPONSE_BUDGET_MS: number) {
|
|
const replayingDurableGitHubIngress =
|
|
provider === "github" && Boolean(internalContext?.githubIngressActionId);
|
|
const ignoreSupersededIngress = () => {
|
|
if (internalContext) internalContext.superseded = true;
|
|
return new Response("ignored", { status: 200 });
|
|
};
|
|
const matchesGitHubIngressFence = (context: LifecycleRuntimeFence) => {
|
|
if (!replayingDurableGitHubIngress) return true;
|
|
const matches =
|
|
context.generation ===
|
|
internalContext?.githubIngressFence?.generation &&
|
|
context.credentialFingerprint ===
|
|
internalContext?.githubIngressFence?.credentialFingerprint;
|
|
if (!matches && internalContext) internalContext.superseded = true;
|
|
return matches;
|
|
};
|
|
const githubResponseDeadlineAt =
|
|
provider === "github" && !replayingDurableGitHubIngress
|
|
? Date.now() +
|
|
Math.max(
|
|
1,
|
|
Math.min(
|
|
responseBudgetMs ??
|
|
GITHUB_WEBHOOK_RESPONSE_BUDGET_MS,
|
|
9_000,
|
|
),
|
|
)
|
|
: null;
|
|
const completeGitHubPreflightBeforeDeadline = async <T>(
|
|
task: Promise<T>,
|
|
): Promise<
|
|
{ completed: true; value: T } | { completed: false; value?: never }
|
|
> => {
|
|
if (githubResponseDeadlineAt === null)
|
|
return { completed: true, value: await task };
|
|
const remaining = githubResponseDeadlineAt - Date.now();
|
|
if (remaining <= 0) return { completed: false };
|
|
let timeout: ReturnType<typeof setTimeout> | null = null;
|
|
try {
|
|
return await Promise.race([
|
|
task.then((value) => ({ completed: true as const, value })),
|
|
new Promise<{ completed: false; value?: never }>((resolve) => {
|
|
timeout = setTimeout(
|
|
() => resolve({ completed: false }),
|
|
remaining,
|
|
);
|
|
timeout.unref?.();
|
|
}),
|
|
]);
|
|
} finally {
|
|
if (timeout) clearTimeout(timeout);
|
|
}
|
|
};
|
|
return { replayingDurableGitHubIngress, ignoreSupersededIngress, matchesGitHubIngressFence, githubResponseDeadlineAt, completeGitHubPreflightBeforeDeadline };
|
|
}
|
|
export type GitHubWebhookScope = ReturnType<typeof createGitHubWebhookScope>;
|
|
|
|
export function githubWebhookCanRecoverRevokedInstallation(
|
|
status: EndpointRow["status"] | undefined,
|
|
provider: ChatSdkProvider,
|
|
request: Pick<Request, "headers">,
|
|
): boolean {
|
|
return status === "revoked" && provider === "github" &&
|
|
request.headers.get("x-github-event") === "installation";
|
|
}
|