mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-21 08:22:20 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
d1463fb79e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages AI agent work and message delivery. > - Delivery workers restore saved retry and maintenance deadlines. > - The coordinator converts each future deadline to a delay and back. > - A clock tick between those reads can move the deadline. > - This pull request keeps the saved future timestamp. > - A deterministic test covers the clock tick. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16503. This separate fix addresses an unrelated CI failure found during its review. **What happened?** The unchanged delayed GitHub publication restart test intermittently reports a wake deadline one millisecond after the saved timestamp. The coordinator subtracts one clock reading from the deadline, then adds the delay to a later reading. **Expected behavior** Keep a future saved deadline exactly. Preserve the current retry behavior for expired deadlines during idle reconciliation. **Steps to reproduce** Register a task with a future `nextRunAt` timestamp. Advance `Date.now()` by one millisecond on each read. The old coordinator reports `nextWakeAt()` one millisecond after the saved timestamp. The new unit test forces this sequence. ## What Changed - Let the internal scheduler accept the existing absolute future deadline. - Keep relative retry and immediate wake scheduling unchanged. - Add a deterministic advancing-clock regression. Keep the chat integration assertion unchanged. ## Verification - Based on `origin/master` at `c91f7a6e5f`. - Coordinator suite and the unchanged delayed GitHub publication restart case: 16 passed, 1346 unrelated cases skipped. - The new regression fails against the original coordinator with the exact one-millisecond offset. - Server typecheck passed. - On head `d2db3e15d6dfafd390bab59529474abebb19d09c`, all 55 hosted checks passed, with 2 expected skips. This includes all server/chat shards, Runner checks, build, canary dry run, security checks, and end-to-end tests. - Standard Greptile and Apex are both 5/5 on that exact head, with no review threads. Apex completed after green CI; final CI verification remains fully green and the branch is mergeable. - `git diff --check` and the pre-push secret/PII scan passed. ## Risks Low risk. The change keeps the saved future timestamp. Existing tests cover retry, idle drain, preemption, and shutdown behavior. No schema or API change is required. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and testing. The exact deployment model ID and context window 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 references) - [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [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 (no public contract changed) - [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 Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>