Files
PaperClipAI/packages/shared
DottaandPaperclip 932ddb7b37 feat: browse GitHub repository access across organizations (#12998)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - GitHub connections give agents access to approved repositories.
> - One GitHub identity can use installations across several
organizations.
> - The permissions page linked to one installation and showed an
unfiltered list.
> - Users could not easily find another organization or inspect a large
selection.
> - This change adds account filtering, search, and access configuration
links.
> - Users can inspect repository access in one compact view.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #12993. Related repository-catalog work in #11228 and #11234 was
checked. This change only improves the existing GitHub connection
permissions page.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The GitHub connection permissions page and its repository display
metadata.

**Current behavior**

The page links directly to an existing installation. The repository list
has no account filter, search, height limit, or private-repository
marker. Refresh access occupies a separate section.

**Proposed behavior**

Show all authorized repositories by default. Filter by account or
organization and search by name. Open GitHub's account chooser to
configure access across organizations. Show GitHub icons and
private-repository locks. Keep refresh beside configuration and limit
the visible list to about ten rows.

**Reason and benefit**

Users can find repositories across organizations and configure missing
access without creating another GitHub identity. Large repository lists
no longer fill the page.

**Breaking changes**

None. Repository display metadata gains an optional private flag. Older
snapshots remain valid and gain the flag after access refresh. No SQL
migration is required.

## What Changed

- Add an All accounts view, account filter, search, and empty states.
- Link both configuration controls to GitHub's app account chooser.
- Place an accessible refresh icon beside the configuration button.
- Keep the repository heading and list in one section.
- Add GitHub icons and private-repository locks.
- Cap the scrollable list at ten rows using a design token.
- Persist GitHub's private flag only when the provider returns a
boolean.
- Recover missing legacy app configuration from GitHub installation
metadata.
- Update tests and the GitHub connection runbook.

## Verification

- Focused tests passed: 54 permissions-page tests and four GitHub
metadata tests.
- UI and server typechecks passed before submission. Token gates passed.
- Browser checks verified account filtering, search, empty results, and
the configuration destination.
- The live list contained 40 repositories. Its final height was 272
pixels, which fits ten single-line rows with gaps. Scrolling retained
all rows.
- A live access refresh populated 30 private-repository lock icons from
GitHub metadata.
- Full workspace typecheck and build passed. The broad local suite
stopped in the general-server group with 18 failed files. Failures
include macOS temporary-path handling and embedded PostgreSQL startup.
That run also overlapped the legacy fix and retained a stale GitHub
module; the final focused run passed all 58 tests. Clean-runner CI is
tracked separately.
- Latest-head review is 5/5 with the legacy chooser finding resolved.
All CI checks passed on commit
`0ff2b63f348f5c87d8b7df6e43388f60f5d872d9`, including build, typecheck,
all test shards, browser tests, and canary dry run.

## Risks

- Older repository snapshots lack visibility metadata until refreshed.
Unknown visibility does not display a lock.
- The account filter lists authorized installation owners. Users add
other organizations through GitHub's chooser.
- Filtering changes only the displayed list. GitHub remains
authoritative for repository access.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (`gpt-6-astra`) via Codex. Reasoning, code execution, and
browser tools were used. The exact context window size was not exposed.

## 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>
2026-09-07 10:01:58 -05:00
..