mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-03 17:51:58 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
919ddbf46d
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip keeps task files in managed workspaces. > - A final remote save commits a durable snapshot and clears writer authority. > - The old allocation can remain recorded while its transport becomes unavailable. > - Files still tried that live allocation before the accepted saved version. > - This PR reads the validated save when authority is clean and no writer owns it. > - Dirty work and active writers still require the live allocation. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Related: #18403 introduced remote Files access. #18665 fixes a separate completion-settlement issue and is included in the base. **What happened?** A file preview returned `422 workspace_unavailable` after a remote task had saved its files. Its clean authority still had a live location. The same original bytes were readable from the committed save after that location cleared. The exact original live transport failure is unknown. **Expected behavior** Once the workspace is clean and has no writer, Files reads its exact current committed save. A retained location must not make accepted files depend on remote command execution. **Steps to reproduce** Create a real committed workspace archive. Keep its allocation active in the recorded authority. Clear dirty state and writer authority. Make live execution unavailable, then request the ordinary file preview route. Before this fix it returns 422. After this fix it returns the saved bytes without a provider command. ## What Changed - Select the saved-file loader before consulting a live location when authority is clean and has no writer. - Keep exact company, workspace, snapshot, archive, and authority-change checks. - Keep the live path for dirty work and active writers. Never substitute their older saved bytes. - Cover browse, resolve, preview, download, rejection controls, and saved-copy cleanup through real routes and storage. - Document the selection rule and update its feature and access-map recipes. ## Verification - Red: the new ordinary-route regression expected HTTP 200 but received 422 against the old service. - A separate compatibility control reproduced the optional-loader regression. Valid live reads still work when the loader is absent; no-location reads still fail, and a configured invalid save never falls back to live bytes. - Green: 98 ordinary file-route and authorization tests passed with real PostgreSQL and archive storage. - All 46 opt-in remote workspace lifecycle tests passed against one owned local disposable PostgreSQL database. Its database, server, and files were cleaned after the run. No live S3 or provider flags were enabled. - Full workspace typecheck passed after the optional-loader compatibility repair. Full build passed locally before that narrow repair. All normal CI checks pass on the current head, including build and server suites. The separate Paperclip Review job and the full local test suite remain in progress. - Feature/access-map validation and `git diff --check` passed. - A read-only staging check preserved and verified the original saved bytes. It did not rerun the agent or qualify the failed journey. The fixed active-location path has local regression evidence; deployed acceptance is pending. ## Risks A clean workspace now uses the existing bounded saved-archive loader while a location remains recorded. Each Files request can retrieve and extract that archive. Existing disk, size, concurrency, cancellation, and cleanup bounds remain. A dirty workspace or current writer still uses live files and fails closed when they are unavailable. This change neither releases compute nor changes access permissions. It does not identify the original provider RPC subreason. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex with reasoning, code execution, and browser tools. 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 - [ ] 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>