mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-29 12:59:13 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
c74171d620
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip coordinates agents while retaining their work and execution authority. > - A failed native run can schedule an exact-session retry and retain a sandbox. > - An explicit task Retry can already have completed successfully on a successor. > - Recovery correctly refuses the old run after its task execution lock changes. > - It nevertheless leaves that old retry scheduled and its workspace without a preservation owner. > - This change retires that proven superseded retry and registers exact-source preservation together. > - Existing stop receipts and saved-file verification still control workspace switching. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A native sandbox run failed before starting a provider turn. An explicit Retry completed on a linked successor. The original coordinator remained in `retryable_failure` with an active sandbox lease. Restart recovery returned `issue_execution_lock_changed`, while the ordinary sweep kept delaying it. A pending workspace selection then made every new task run fail during setup. **Expected behavior** Stop replaying a failed retry after its linked explicit successor has completed. Preserve the original files through the existing system worker. Keep the current task, ownership, pending choice, and unresolved action outcomes intact. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Persist a failed, unowned native run with a prepared remote workspace and `retryable_failure` coordinator. 2. Complete a same-company/task/agent explicit Retry linked to that run. 3. Release the task's old execution lock and schedule a workspace selection. 4. Run startup or ordinary retry recovery. Observe the old retry remain scheduled and the selection fail with an unfinished-recovery conflict. **Paperclip version or commit** Regression reproduced against `644937c931`. The current repair is based on refreshed master `60b8089a44`. **Deployment mode** Native Runner with remote sandbox workspaces. The reported runtime used ACPX Claude with per-turn lifecycle. The original provider session-resume rejection is not independently reproduced or claimed fixed here; this PR addresses the subsequent stranded recovery. Related: #17839 records preservation when restart classification becomes terminal. This change handles the earlier lock-mismatch return and ordinary retry admission after a completed explicit successor. It uses the same preservation service and does not require that PR. ## What Changed - Share a narrow superseded-retry settlement between startup recovery and the ordinary retry sweep. - Require a failed source with no coordinator owner or process, its exact prepared source lease, and a completed linked successor under the same company, task and agent. - Atomically retire replay and register preservation. Do not alter task state or create another provider run. - Add PostgreSQL lifecycle/safety regressions, a real-file preservation and workspace-selection regression, and execution/map documentation. ## Verification - Red: both startup and ordinary admission regressions left the old coordinator in `retryable_failure` with no preservation obligation. - Green: the same two cases retire the retry and retain the exact lease without another run or task mutation. - The assembled PostgreSQL/filesystem regression passes: workspace selection remains blocked before preservation, the existing service saves `saved.txt` and preserves newer local work, then the normal selection guard applies the pending shared workspace. - All 90 native retention/resumption cases pass. Three neighboring startup-recovery cases pass, including the blocked-owner inventory. Full recursive typecheck and full build pass at runtime head `23ddb213b4`; final `19d7738ae3` only moves the function comment into execution documentation. Map, module-boundary and diff checks pass. The duplicate full local Vitest run was stopped after 20 minutes in its first long general shard once the complete current-head hosted test gates passed; no complete local-suite pass is claimed. - Current-head CI has 53 passing checks and two intended Storybook skips, including full typecheck, all test shards, build, Runner verification, browser shards and both aggregate gates. The separate `commitperclip PR Review` job is still queued on `ubuntu-latest` with no assigned runner; its outcome remains pending. Greptile reviewed exact head `19d7738ae3` at 5/5, with zero unresolved threads. - Live acceptance passes on exact final source `19d7738ae3`: a disposable Daytona Linux sandbox, the current immutable staging fleet snapshot, SDK 0.203.0, a Darwin arm64 source host and Node 26.4.0. The real native workspace preparation/export and provider stop/start paths preserve an unpredictable report and newer host files. The ordinary workspace-selection guard stays blocked until preservation commits, then applies the pending shared workspace. - The old workload's start count and side-effect marker each remain one. Recovery creates no new run or native result. The sandbox finishes stopped and is then deleted by the probe; a final provider read confirms it is absent. - A second live acceptance also passes on the original runtime's older immutable snapshot with the source explicitly archived before recovery. It verifies cold source reopening, the same report/newer-file checks, one workload start and side effect, pending workspace application, and confirmed deletion. Its initial probe attempt used immediate archive/deletion reads and failed during asynchronous cleanup observation; bounded provider-state polling fixed the probe without a product change. The abandoned probe allocation is independently confirmed absent. - Scope: database fixtures represent the already-failed run and completed explicit successor. The old workload is a persistent shell process with observable file/side-effect markers, not a paid Claude turn. This qualifies the repaired recovery handoff and real provider preservation; it does not reproduce the initial ACPX session-resume rejection. - The original hosted task has only been inspected read-only. No rollout or original-task recovery is claimed. ## Risks - Incorrect successor classification could retire legitimate work. Matching requires the server-persisted explicit Retry link, same company/task/agent, later successful committed execution, no current source execution lock, no recorded process, no coordinator owner, and no workspace finalization owner. - Retirement is not a stop receipt. The exact source remains retained, unknown effects remain unknown, and workspace switching still waits for the existing worker's stop and file-persistence proof. - A failed preservation transaction rolls back retirement. No new scan, retry budget, schema or public API is introduced. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use and code execution. The host does not expose a more specific model ID or the 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 — focused suites and live acceptance; full-suite status above - [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 — separate template-review job still queued as noted above - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — exact head `19d7738ae3` - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>