mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
DottaandPaperclip
d2d647c34b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Connections give agents access to external services with a selected credential identity. > - A removed connection keeps its database row so Paperclip can retain its history. > - A fresh GitHub setup can select a different identity from the removed connection. > - The retained row incorrectly kept its old credential policy after that new selection. > - The GitHub callback then could not save the new grant and returned the user to setup. > - This pull request applies the explicit identity selection when Paperclip revives an archived row. > - The benefit is a successful GitHub reconnect after the user changes from a dedicated agent account to a personal account. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** After a user removed a dedicated-agent GitHub connection, a fresh setup with “My GitHub account” returned to the setup page with `oauth=failed`. The Cloud claim succeeded, but the local connection still used the old `per_agent` policy. **Expected behavior** A fresh setup must apply the explicit identity choice. An interrupted draft or an explicit reconnect must keep its existing identity. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Connect GitHub with a dedicated agent identity. 2. Remove the connection. 3. Start a fresh GitHub connection with “My GitHub account.” 4. Complete GitHub OAuth. 5. Observe that Paperclip returns to the setup page instead of the permissions page. **Paperclip version or commit** `342c01fee` **Deployment mode** Local dev (`pnpm dev`) with embedded Postgres and the staging managed connector. **Additional context** This follows the GitHub access UI change in #12893. ## What Changed - Apply an explicit Access identity when a fresh gallery setup revives an archived connection row. - Preserve the identity for interrupted drafts and explicit reconnects. - Do not carry credential material across an identity change. - Apply the omitted organization default during a fresh archived-row recovery. - Restore the prior grants and credential policy transactionally if a revived setup rolls back. - Disable the connection and surface a specific failure if that restoration cannot complete. - Preserve newer concurrent grant changes with a row lock and optimistic version check. - Preserve newer concurrent connection identity/configuration changes with a locked state fingerprint. - Add regressions for dedicated-to-personal OAuth, organization-default recovery, rollback, rollback failure, and concurrent grant/connection changes. ## Verification - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/tool-access-service.test.ts` — 222 tests passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` — passed. - Browser proof on an isolated local instance: dedicated connection removed, personal setup selected, staging GitHub OAuth completed, permissions page opened, connection reported active and healthy, personal grant active, old agent grant revoked. ## Risks - Low migration risk. This change has no schema migration. - The behavior changes only when a fresh setup explicitly selects an identity for an archived connection row. - Existing draft resume and explicit reconnect behavior stays unchanged. - Connection-manager checks still protect changes to a retained credential identity. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with reasoning, browser control, tool use, and code 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 - [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>