Files
PaperClipAI/packages
DottaandPaperclip ba5bba86dc fix(server): wake GitHub acknowledgements from committed changes (#17656)
<!-- entire-trail-link-start -->
https://entire.com/gh/paperclipai/-/trails/206/changes/paperclip/206
<!-- entire-trail-link-end -->

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip coordinates agent work and presents its progress in chat.
> - GitHub deliveries save acknowledgement actions and provider
receipts.
> - Periodic maintenance currently searches for unfinished
acknowledgements even when idle.
> - Committed delivery, lease, response and presentation changes
identify when work can advance.
> - The existing owner should wake on those changes and recover only at
saved deadlines.
> - Completed history should become quiet without losing unfinished
provider effects.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17653, which is merged. This existing GitHub acknowledgement slice
targets master.

**Problem:** A saved GitHub acknowledgement can wait for a publication
lease, fast-response result or native presentation decision. Polling
empty or unchanged work keeps the tenant active. Removing maintenance
without covering these producers can strand the acknowledgement.

**Expected behavior:** Committed changes wake the scoped owner. It
reconstructs existing actions on startup, retries at saved deadlines,
parks unchanged presentation waits and becomes quiet when settled.

## What Changed

- Register GitHub acknowledgement work with the shared scoped deadline
coordinator. Reuse existing action, delivery, lease and fast-response
rows.
- Add transaction-aware response-availability notifications at supported
writes. Keep GitHub protocol details in its platform owner and shared
notifications limited to IDs.
- Share the bounded latest-request/run projection between scheduling and
direct response authorization. An absent native presentation decision
parks the action until its real writer commits.
- Retain publication leases, source/principal authority, version
fencing, response markers and final receipt precedence. Check admission
before each new provider request; let in-flight work settle. Stop does
not consume the provider retry budget.
- Remove only recurring acknowledgement recovery and keep its manual
path. Add no work table or scheduler service.
- Regenerate the three original indexes as
`0400_absent_phantom_reporter.sql`: pending acknowledgement IDs,
fast-response delivery lookup and publication comment/destination
lookup. Each uses concurrent/idempotent creation and the existing
top-level migration runner. Preserve all landed SQL/journal entries and
the five newest snapshots.

## Verification

Published head: `09ca00b9f029838434ec042cda691345d67b493e`, on landed
continuation parent `063cfd43813cabf18417605fb9eefb9aacf95c8d`.

- **87 distinct current cases pass:** 18 real PostgreSQL acknowledgement
lifecycle/presentation cases, all 26 fast-response service cases, all 30
heartbeat completion cases and all 13 startup cases. Database build,
server typechecking/build, module boundaries and three fresh migrations
through 0400 pass. The current Runner bundle rebuild also passes after
upstream provider-event changes.
- The lifecycle matrix covers empty/history quiet, lease release,
restart, drain/standby, fast-response failure/expiry/publication/unknown
outcome, streaming quarantine, outer rollback/commit, saved provider
retry, stop between requests and receipt state. The real presentation
writer proves quiet while pending, rollback, committed reactivation and
final quiet.
- The earlier **305-case** matrix (236 full GitHub workflow cases, 26
fast-response service cases, 30 completion cases and 13 startup cases)
passes at `337f272853d4f8a51b5b9300900a46eb4e13f698`. It retains its
prepared-parent scope. Repeated cases are not added to current 87.
- A populated 0399 database upgrades to 0400 with all 398 prior
migration receipts unchanged, one new receipt and no additional receipt
on replay. All three indexes are valid/ready on fresh and upgraded
databases. Their SQL definitions match the original draft after
whitespace normalization; migration history and retained snapshot bytes
are preserved.
- Normal integration `9b3607e159153e00ccdfe538d52b591bd38d6499`
preserves the full 28-path owned binary patch and all 20 unrelated
master paths, including native retry, provider-event and evaluation
workflow changes. Both normal merge parents and the exact tree are
checked. No force push or rebase occurs.
- [The owner
audit](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/09ca00b9f029838434ec042cda691345d67b493e/doc/plans/2026-10-25-github-chat-maintenance-sleep-audit.md#acceptance-on-the-actual-landed-continuation-parent)
retains the original missing-notification, JSON precedence, receipt
lifecycle, external-database fixture and migration-registry failures.
Earlier 69/228/broad counts keep their original scope. Skips and failed
revisions are not relabelled as current passes.
- The final audit-only edit leaves all owned source/test/migration
hashes unchanged. **Fresh exact-head CI and Greptile 5/5 with no
actionable findings remain required.** No full local repository, live
GitHub tenant or deployed sleep result is claimed.

## Risks

- Process-local transaction hints cover supported application writers
and shared pools. Independent SQL writers and other replicas do not gain
a new wake guarantee.
- Provider effects remain guarded by the existing publication lease and
current source/principal authority. Unknown outcomes retain their
existing recovery semantics.
- Presentation waits depend on their supported milestone/transaction
producers. A missing producer can defer recovery until another supported
change or restart.
- Index creation can take time on large histories and runs concurrently
outside a transaction. Existing migration recovery handles replay; prior
SQL is unchanged.
- Worker quiet is distinct from host/database suspension. Cloud wake
coverage and sleep admission remain unchanged; later maintenance duties
are separate slices.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, using reasoning, repository inspection, code execution and
real PostgreSQL tests. The exact model 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
- [ ] 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>
2026-10-28 16:06:42 -05:00
..