mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-20 15:09:57 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
7e0f051d3b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The task properties panel helps operators inspect and update task data. > - The status, assignee, and project rows used different leading icon sizes. > - The mixed sizes made the rows look uneven. > - The assignee avatar already provides the correct 24px visual size. > - This pull request sets the status and project visuals to that same size. > - The benefit is a tidy and consistent properties panel. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The task properties panel showed a 12px status icon, a 24px assignee avatar, and a 16px project tile. **Expected behavior** The status, assignee, and project rows must use the same 24px leading visual size. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Open a task. 2. Open the Properties panel. 3. Compare the Status, Assignee, and Project rows. ## What Changed - Keep the Status glyph at 16px and use spacing to give it the 24px avatar footprint. - Set the Project row tile to the 24px small tile size. - Add a regression check for the Status row size. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx` (72 tests passed) - `pnpm check:token-gates` (all gates clean) - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` (passed) - Full repository typecheck and build reached the Rust runner step, but this environment does not contain `cargo`. - The full test command was stopped after unrelated chat integration tests did not finish. The focused UI suite passed. ## Risks - Low risk. This change only changes visual sizes in three property rows. - The wider status footprint can use slightly more horizontal space in a narrow panel. > This fix does not overlap with planned core work in `ROADMAP.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5.6, tool use and code execution enabled. ## 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>