mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-25 02:26:12 +02:00
9fb28d06ff
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - The release process promotes a soaked beta to stable. The stable GitHub Release body comes from `releases/beta/v<beta-version>.md` on `master` > - The `draft_stable_notes` job pushed a commit-log skeleton to this branch when `2026.1023.0-beta.0` published (workflow run 40013393296) > - The skeleton is grouped commit subjects. It is not in release-notes voice and it does not tell a self-hoster what to do before an upgrade > - Stable `v2026.1023.0` was published from `2026.1012.1-beta.0` while this draft was open, so the previous stable is now `v2026.1023.0`, not `v2026.1012.0`. The notes must describe only what changed after it > - This pull request replaces the skeleton with curated notes. Each claim traces to a pull request in `v2026.1023.0..d69631b0` > - The benefit is that the earliest stable promotion (v2026.1026.0) finds finished notes on `master` on time, and readers of the `v2026.1023.0` changelog are not told about the same features twice ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Missing content **Where is the issue?** `releases/beta/v2026.1023.0-beta.0.md` is the stable-notes file for the `2026.1023.0-beta.0` soak. It exists only on this machine-owned branch and only as the auto-generated skeleton. **What's wrong?** The stable promotion reads this file from `master` and publishes it as the GitHub Release body. Until this branch merges, the stable preflight has no notes to resolve. The skeleton lists 715 raw commit subjects with nested PR summaries, 200 of which already shipped in `v2026.1023.0`. It does not call out the changes that need operator attention before the upgrade. **Suggested fix** Merge the curated notes so the notes invariant holds for the v2026.1026.0 promotion. Correct the `> Released:` date in a follow-up if the promotion date slips. ## What Changed - Replaced the skeleton in `releases/beta/v2026.1023.0-beta.0.md` with curated stable notes for v2026.1026.0 in the same layout as `releases/v2026.1023.0.md`: overview, Breaking Changes, Highlights, Fixes, Improvements, Upgrade Guide, Contributors - The notes are delta-framed against `releases/v2026.1023.0.md`. Features that stable already describes (private tasks, model gateways, Slack self-setup, the two-screen GitHub review bot, the Costs ledger, MCP assistant edits, the Operator preset change, OpenAI Dot, the primary agent, decision models, agent identity keys) are not repeated. Bullets that mixed shipped and new work were split so only the new work remains - Breaking Changes lists the removal of the Pipelines experiment (#16834), Sentry run-failure reporting off by default (#16300), the bounded run history list (#16286), and the `--yes` flag on `instructions-file:delete` (#11504) - Highlights cover the Paperclip Runner as the default for new agents, GitHub Copilot as a native harness, project repositories as skill sources, prompt injection prevention, OTLP observability, the unified Google Workspace connection, self-cleaning workspaces with restore points, bulk roster edits, Grok Bot and Muse, Speko, and the Slack, GitHub bot, Apps catalog, and Audit commentary follow-ups - Upgrade Guide enumerates migrations `0334` through `0374` with one-phrase effects, including the constraint rewrites in `0340` and `0361` and the index in `0360`, the new environment variables with defaults, the new default-off experimental settings, the `commentary:view` grant and its startup re-seeding, the Docker image entrypoint change, and the API changes - Release and CI internals, smoke specs, canary tooling, Paperclip Cloud work, dependency bumps, and test-only changes are left out ## Verification - Beta publish is complete: npm dist-tag `beta` is `2026.1023.0-beta.0`, tag `beta/v2026.1023.0-beta.0` points at `d69631b01b9c658f80bf8bed389863dce82643e1`, and the `publish_beta`, `smoke_beta`, and `draft_stable_notes` jobs in run 40013393296 all succeeded - Stable `v2026.1023.0` (tag at `1b4c803816e82b0265c8422e1a804327a7ed8c54`, the `2026.1012.1-beta.0` source commit) is an ancestor of `d69631b0`; `git rev-list --count v2026.1023.0..d69631b01b9c658f80bf8bed389863dce82643e1` returns 515, which matches the overview and Contributors section - Contributors are the 26 unique GitHub logins of the commit authors in the range, read from the GitHub compare API with `[bot]` accounts excluded. The 21 external handles are thanked by name - `./scripts/release.sh stable --date 2026-10-26 --print-version` returns `2026.1026.0` - Every `#NNNN` link in the file was checked: none is a commit subject in `v2026.1012.0..v2026.1023.0`, and each is either a squash-merge subject in `v2026.1023.0..d69631b0` or a pull request whose `merge_commit_sha` lies in that range (#14180, #16356, #16401, #16403, #16976) - Migration numbers, setting keys, env var names, defaults, and harness pins were checked in the code at the source commit and at `v2026.1023.0`, not in commit subjects - The file contains no internal ticket ids or instance-local links - The compare view for this branch shows one changed file and no source changes ## Risks - Low risk: a single markdown file, no source changes. If the promotion date slips past 2026-10-26, the `> Released:` line and H1 need a one-line update before the stable dispatch. The beta-keyed filename makes that re-date harmless - The notes assume the next stable is promoted from this beta. If a later beta is promoted instead, its own notes file supersedes this one ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1` (Claude Fable 5.1), extended thinking enabled, tool use via Claude Code ## 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: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <bender-fable@users.noreply.github.com>