mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-22 16:51:28 +02:00
2b8da4ab64
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release process keeps one curated notes file for each release in `releases/` > - Beta notes live in `releases/beta/` until the beta becomes a stable release > - v2026.1012.0 was published from beta 2026.1006.0-beta.0 on 2026-10-12 and its notes file still has the beta path on master > - The release workflow did not push its usual canonicalize branch because the notes came from the source tree of the release candidate > - This pull request renames the beta notes file to the stable path > - The benefit is that the stable notes link `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` resolves on master and the beta path does not stay as a duplicate ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the problem** The stable release v2026.1012.0 is published. The GitHub Release body is the notes file that PR #16000 merged. On master, that file is still at `releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md`. The stable path `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` does not exist on master. Links to the stable path return 404. **Expected behavior** The notes for v2026.1012.0 are at `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` on master. The beta path is removed. The content is identical to the GitHub Release body. **Additional context** Related: #16000 (pre-publish notes fix) and #15388 (curated beta notes). ## What Changed - Rename `releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md` to `releases/v2026.1012.0.md`. - This is a pure rename. The file content does not change. Git reports `R100`. ## Verification - Run `git diff -M --name-status master...release-notes/v2026.1012.0-canonicalize`. The output is one line: `R100 releases/beta/v2026.1006.0-beta.0.md releases/v2026.1012.0.md`. - Compare the file with the GitHub Release body at https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/releases/tag/v2026.1012.0. The content is the same. The git blob is `e7503b64aa5bcb74b2da6bb05a7da2554919e0ec` on both master and this branch. - The git tag `v2026.1012.0` points at the release candidate commit `bba6a45f0d364cfd962ac59b3bdf2426a8222adb`. That commit already has the same file at `releases/v2026.1012.0.md` with the same blob. ## Risks - Low risk. This is a documentation rename with no content change. No code or config changes. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, used through Claude Code with tool use and extended reasoning. The rename was done with `git mv`. No AI-generated content is in the file. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>