mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 06:10:44 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
b1049b174e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Before a per-turn follow-up starts a new runner, it retires the previous turn's finished owner. Retirement requires the owner's controller journal to be settled > - A local runner that is proven stopped can no longer act on its own lifecycle commands, so an unfinished `runner.suspend` from it does not hold the follow-up > - On a remote per-turn sandbox the same thing happens when a restart or drain lands while the runner is suspending. But the remote path had no equivalent rule, so the unfinished `runner.suspend` held the follow-up even after the previous run's sandbox lease had ended > - This pull request treats a remote owner's lifecycle commands as settled once every sandbox lease of that run has been released or expired, and none of them is the sandbox the follow-up now uses > - The benefit is that a C1 follow-up after a restart on Daytona continues on its own ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20140 **What happened?** Daytona per-turn restart-chaos K13 storm w-20261109T074128-s9503 (revision9046884811, image 01246d43): 60 of 65 passed. Three C1 follow-ups failed with `runner_state_identity_mismatch: prior_owner_terminal_state_indeterminate; retirement_refused=journal_commands_unsettled(runner.suspend.pending)`: - t04 codex, run `c7446d0c`; - t16 claude, run `4b2c770f`; - t39 claude, run `3ef7d934`. For t04, the previous owner `fc585314` committed its `run.terminal`, and its journal kept only `runner.suspend` pending. Its per-turn lease (`5576f27d…`) expired at 07:43:52, and the follow-up ran on a new sandbox. Each Retry succeeded. **Expected behavior** Once the previous run's sandbox leases have all ended, and the follow-up runs on another sandbox, the previous runner cannot act on its suspend. The finished owner is retired and the follow-up continues. The owner stays held while any of these holds: - a lease is active, retained or pending cleanup; - the follow-up runs on the same sandbox; - no lease is recorded. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Finish a remote per-turn run whose controller journal keeps `runner.suspend` pending after its committed run terminal, and let its sandbox lease end. 2. Start a follow-up on a new sandbox. Before this change, retirement refuses with `journal_commands_unsettled(runner.suspend.pending)`. **Paperclip version or commit**9046884811(wave). Branch rebased on current master. ## What Changed - `native-session-executor.ts`: - the new `priorRemoteSandboxLeasesEnded` checks the previous run's `environment_leases`: at least one lease, every one `released` or `expired` with `releasedAt`, and none on the current target's provider lease; - `inspectFinishedPerTurnRunnerdOwner` passes the result as `remoteRunnerGone` to `readSettledRunnerdProjection`, for the live root and for quarantined copies. That function then ignores unfinished runner lifecycle commands (`runner.suspend`, `runner.drain`, `runner.shutdown`), exactly as it already does for a stopped local runner. - `native-recovered-owner-followup.test.ts`: a red/green test with lease variants. A lease that ended or was released on another sandbox is admitted. A retained lease, an ended lease on the same sandbox, or no lease record stays held. ## Verification - Red/green: on master, the two admitted cases fail with exactly the production error; with the change they are admitted. The three held cases hold on both. - `vitest run` of the recovered-owner, remote-warm and restart-recovery test files and `native-session-executor.test.ts`: 7 files, 1634 tests passed (14 skipped). - `PAPERCLIP_TYPECHECK_LOW_MEMORY=1 pnpm typecheck` (`server`): passed. ## Risks - Low risk. Only runner lifecycle commands become settled, and only when the database proves every sandbox of the previous run has ended and the follow-up runs elsewhere. Unfinished turn, tool or result commands, a missing run terminal and unanswered tool input still hold. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, test execution). ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>