mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-10 12:07:09 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
d9f600043f
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages projects and their repositories. > - Resource changes commit to a durable lifecycle journal. > - Project archive changes currently leave no journal record. > - Consumers need to observe archive and restore transitions. > - The record must commit with the project change. > - This PR adds project archive capture before plugin delivery in #15343. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Problem or motivation** Archiving a project does not record a lifecycle event. Restoring an archived project also emits no event when it is the only change. Consumers cannot observe these transitions through the journal. **Proposed solution** Record `archive` when an active project becomes archived. Record `update` when an archived project is restored. Keep both writes in the existing project transaction and row lock. Repeated status requests emit no new status record. **Alternatives considered** An in-process notification can disappear on restart. A separate archive service would duplicate the existing mutation path. Use the existing journal and project transaction. **Roadmap alignment** This extends lifecycle capture from #15280 and #15306. It should merge before the delivery PR #15343. The roadmap and related PR search showed no duplicate archive lifecycle capture. ## What Changed - Allow project `archive` records in the journal constraint and TypeScript type. - Capture archive and restore transitions under the existing project row lock. - Emit `update` then `archive` for an edit combined with archive. - Preserve repository records and roll back the project change if capture fails. - Add migration `0307_cool_naoko.sql`, tests, and database documentation. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed after the final master rebase. - `pnpm build` passed before the final master rebase; the final CI build also passed. - 20 targeted lifecycle, migration snapshot, and legacy restore tests passed on the current migration. - Tests cover concurrent archives, repeated archive/restore requests, repository retention, combined edits, atomic rollback, and upgrades from older JavaScript backups without the action constraint. - All 53 applicable CI checks passed on final commit `1021953035`; the two Storybook checks were skipped as expected. - Greptile scored the final commit 5/5 with no unresolved review threads. - `git diff --check` and a local secret/PII scan passed. - Prior CI found a missing-constraint restore failure; the migration now handles it. A separate runtime readiness timeout passed locally. The current full CI run passes both paths. ## Risks - Older JavaScript restores may omit the action check. The migration tolerates its absence and installs the complete check. - Apply the constraint migration before running the new capture code. It takes a short table lock and validates existing journal rows; it changes no existing records. - This PR captures future transitions only. The one-time baseline and plugin consumption remain in #15343, which must be rebased after this PR merges. - Archive records authorize no provider cleanup. Provider behavior and volume retention remain separate work. - An edit combined with archive emits two ordered records in one transaction. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code execution, and tool use. 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 `#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>