Jannik/PaperClipAI
1
0 Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git synced 2026-10-11 23:36:51 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
dd6742f7d07a67c42ae8a5cd38a958f2e7e9636b
PaperClipAI/doc/RELEASING.md
T
DottaPaperclipClaude Fable 5
 fc5a30805e feat(cli): add managed install, update, and service lifecycle (#10045) 
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source control plane people use to manage
AI-agent companies
> - Operators need a predictable installation path that survives beyond
an ephemeral `npx` process
> - A durable installation needs an owned per-user payload store, stable
command shim, safe shell integration, and supported service lifecycle
> - Updates must preserve recoverability by backing up data, installing
side-by-side, verifying the new payload, and retaining rollback state
> - Bootstrap scripts and privileged service operations must fail closed
across download, filesystem, ownership, and consent boundaries
> - This pull request integrates managed install, update, rollback,
service, uninstall, doctor, bootstrap-installer, and runtime-serving
support into one workflow
> - The benefit is a recoverable, inspectable, and documented
installation lifecycle with explicit safety boundaries across Linux,
macOS, containers, WSL, npm, npx, and source checkouts

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

### Problem

Paperclip lacks a first-class durable installation and lifecycle
workflow. Operators currently have to assemble npm/npx installation,
PATH setup, background-service management, updates, rollback,
diagnostics, and uninstall behavior themselves. That makes upgrades
harder to recover, creates inconsistent behavior across platforms, and
leaves shell/download/service trust boundaries without one documented
implementation.

### Proposed Solution

Add a managed per-user install store and stable shim, a verified shell
bootstrap installer, service lifecycle commands, install-mode-aware
update/rollback behavior, doctor checks, and documentation. Managed
updates back up the database, install and smoke-test a side-by-side
payload, atomically switch `current`, and retain prior payloads. The
shell installer pins registry/download trust boundaries and requires
explicit consent for non-interactive privileged actions.

### Alternatives Considered

- Keep recommending `npx`: simple for evaluation, but ephemeral and
unsuitable for stable services, atomic updates, or rollback.
- Require global npm installation only: familiar, but cannot provide the
owned side-by-side payload store and retained rollback semantics.
- Split the capability across multiple PRs: rejected because install,
update, service, uninstall, bootstrap, and serving behavior share
contracts and security boundaries that need review together.

### Related Pull Requests

- Supersedes #10042 and #10044 with one integrated final diff.
- Incorporates and replaces the closed preparatory work in #10032 and
#10034.

## What Changed

- Added `paperclipai install`, `update`/`upgrade`, rollback, uninstall,
service lifecycle, onboarding integration, and managed-install doctor
checks.
- Added a private managed payload store, verified manifest/marker
ownership, exclusive mutation locks, atomic manifest/current/shim
writes, retained previous payloads, and provenance validation.
- Added npm and GitHub-ref install sources with exact target resolution,
registry isolation, database backup, side-by-side verification, atomic
activation, service restart coordination, and failure rollback.
- Made managed-update backups report actionable service-start and
`--no-backup` recovery guidance for unreachable databases, while clean
never-onboarded instances skip an empty backup.
- Added systemd user and launchd service definitions, status/health/log
commands, single-instance coordination, stale-port recovery, and
explicit sudo/lingering consent handling.
- Added the `scripts/install.sh` bootstrap path with checked two-stage
downloads, pinned public npm registry usage, platform checks,
dry-run/non-interactive controls, and Docker fixtures.
- Added embedded Postgres/native bootstrap integration,
hot-restart/systemd-notify serving support, passive update notices,
configuration contracts, README/CLI/install documentation, and focused
regression tests.
- Security re-review should explicitly re-verify: (1)
`addManagedPathBlock`/`removeManagedPathBlock` reject symlinked or
non-regular rc files, assert current-user ownership, preserve
restrictive modes, and replace atomically; (2) managed shim replacement
rejects unsafe parents, foreign-owned or multiply linked files, and uses
checked atomic replacement; (3) the shell installer and sudo path
preserve explicit consent and checked downloads; and (4) installed
service/runtime serving remains bound to the validated managed shim and
instance configuration.

## Verification

- `bash -n scripts/install.sh scripts/clean-install-git.sh
scripts/clean-install-npm.sh scripts/test-install-sh-docker.sh`
- `pnpm exec vitest run cli/src/__tests__/install-store.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/install-command.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/managed-install-check.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/onboard-service.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/service-health-check.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/service-manager.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/update-command.test.ts
cli/src/__tests__/update-notice.test.ts
packages/db/src/embedded-postgres-native.test.ts` — 9 files, 66 tests
passed
- `pnpm --dir cli typecheck`
- `pnpm --dir cli build`
- Follow-up verification: `pnpm exec vitest run
cli/src/__tests__/update-command.test.ts` (14/14), `pnpm --dir cli
typecheck`, `pnpm --dir cli build`, and `pnpm --filter
@paperclipai/server typecheck`.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`
- `pnpm build`
- Full `pnpm test:run` exercised all suites; an injected static AWS
credential changed one unrelated doctor expectation, which passed when
those credentials were removed. A second run cleared that case and
exposed stale pre-existing adapter-utils `dist` output; rebuilding
`@paperclipai/adapter-utils` made the isolated test pass. The updated PR
CI is the authoritative clean-workspace full-suite run.

## Risks

- Installer/update code writes executable shims, symlinks, shell rc
blocks, service definitions, and managed payloads; ownership,
regular-file, symlink, hard-link, marker, and path-containment checks
fail closed before destructive changes.
- The bootstrap installer executes downloaded tooling; downloads are
staged and checked before execution, npm traffic is pinned to the public
registry, and non-interactive privileged behavior requires explicit
consent.
- Linux lingering may invoke `sudo`; the command is surfaced and
confirmed before execution, and unsupported service managers fall back
to foreground-run guidance.
- Database migrations remain forward-only; payload rollback does not
reverse migrations, so managed updates create a backup before activation
unless explicitly disabled.
- Service restart and runtime serving touch process/port ownership;
lifecycle locks, health/version checks, and stable-shim service
definitions reduce split-brain and stale-process risk.

> 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 coding agents using GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6-sol, with
reasoning, repository/API access, shell execution, and test tooling. The
runtime did not expose a reliable 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
- [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>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 18:52:23 -07:00

257 lines
7.6 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

# Releasing Paperclip
Maintainer runbook for shipping Paperclip across npm, GitHub, and the website-facing changelog surface.
The release model is now commit-driven:
1. Every push to `master` publishes a canary automatically.
2. Stable releases are manually promoted from a chosen tested commit or canary tag.
3. Stable release notes live in `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md`.
4. Only stable releases get GitHub Releases.
## Versioning Model
Paperclip uses calendar versions that still fit semver syntax:
- stable: `YYYY.MDD.P`
- canary: `YYYY.MDD.P-canary.N`
Examples:
- first stable on March 18, 2026: `2026.318.0`
- second stable on March 18, 2026: `2026.318.1`
- fourth canary for the `2026.318.1` line: `2026.318.1-canary.3`
Important constraints:
- the middle numeric slot is `MDD`, where `M` is the UTC month and `DD` is the zero-padded UTC day
- use `2026.303.0` for March 3, not `2026.33.0`
- do not use leading zeroes such as `2026.0318.0`
- do not use four numeric segments such as `2026.3.18.1`
- the semver-safe canary form is `2026.318.0-canary.1`
## Release Surfaces
Every stable release has four separate surfaces:
1. **Verification** — the exact git SHA passes typecheck, tests, and build
2. **npm** — `paperclipai` and public workspace packages are published
3. **GitHub** — the stable release gets a git tag and GitHub Release
4. **Website / announcements** — the stable changelog is published externally and announced
A stable release is done only when all four surfaces are handled.
Canaries only cover the first two surfaces plus an internal traceability tag.
## Core Invariants
- canaries publish from `master`
- stables publish from an explicitly chosen source ref
- tags point at the original source commit, not a generated release commit
- stable notes are always `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md`
- canaries never create GitHub Releases
- canaries never require changelog generation
## TL;DR
### Canary
Every push to `master` runs the canary path inside [`.github/workflows/release.yml`](../.github/workflows/release.yml).
It:
- verifies the pushed commit
- computes the canary version for the current UTC date
- publishes workspace packages dependency-first under npm dist-tag `canary`
- waits for each package version to become registry-visible before continuing
- publishes the user-facing `paperclipai` package last, so `paperclipai@canary` does not advance before the full package set exists
- verifies that `canary` resolves to the just-published version and that published internal dependencies exist on npm
- installs `paperclipai@canary` into a clean temporary prefix as the final npm gate
- fails by default if npm leaves `latest` pointing at a canary; use `--allow-canary-latest` only when that state is intentional
- creates a git tag `canary/vYYYY.MDD.P-canary.N`
Users install canaries with:
```bash
npx paperclipai@canary onboard
# or
npx paperclipai@canary onboard --data-dir "$(mktemp -d /tmp/paperclip-canary.XXXXXX)"
```
### Stable
Use [`.github/workflows/release.yml`](../.github/workflows/release.yml) from the Actions tab with the manual `workflow_dispatch` inputs.
[Run the action here](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/workflows/release.yml)
Inputs:
- `source_ref`
- commit SHA, branch, or tag
- `stable_date`
- optional UTC date override in `YYYY-MM-DD`
- enter a date like `2026-03-18`, not a version like `2026.318.0`
- `dry_run`
- preview only when true
Before running stable:
1. pick the canary commit or tag you trust
2. resolve the target stable version with `./scripts/release.sh stable --date "$(date +%F)" --print-version`
3. create or update `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md` on that source ref
4. run the stable workflow from that source ref
Example:
- `source_ref`: `master`
- `stable_date`: `2026-03-18`
- resulting stable version: `2026.318.0`
The workflow:
- re-verifies the exact source ref
- computes the next stable patch slot for the chosen UTC date
- publishes `YYYY.MDD.P` under npm dist-tag `latest`
- creates git tag `vYYYY.MDD.P`
- creates or updates the GitHub Release from `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md`
## Local Commands
### Preview a canary locally
```bash
./scripts/release.sh canary --dry-run
```
### Preview a stable locally
```bash
./scripts/release.sh stable --dry-run
```
### Publish a stable locally
This is mainly for emergency/manual use. The normal path is the GitHub workflow.
```bash
./scripts/release.sh stable
git push public-gh refs/tags/vYYYY.MDD.P
PUBLISH_REMOTE=public-gh ./scripts/create-github-release.sh YYYY.MDD.P
```
## Stable Changelog Workflow
Stable changelog files live at:
- `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md`
Canaries do not get changelog files.
Recommended local generation flow:
```bash
VERSION="$(./scripts/release.sh stable --date 2026-03-18 --print-version)"
claude --print --output-format stream-json --verbose --dangerously-skip-permissions --model claude-opus-4-6 "Use the release-changelog skill to draft or update releases/v${VERSION}.md for Paperclip. Read doc/RELEASING.md and .agents/skills/release-changelog/SKILL.md, then generate the stable changelog for v${VERSION} from commits since the last stable tag. Do not create a canary changelog."
```
The repo intentionally does not run this through GitHub Actions because:
- canaries are too frequent
- stable notes are the only public narrative surface that needs LLM help
- maintainer LLM tokens should not live in Actions
## Smoke Testing
For a canary:
```bash
PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=canary ./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
```
For the current stable:
```bash
PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=latest ./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
```
Useful isolated variants:
```bash
HOST_PORT=3232 DATA_DIR=./data/release-smoke-canary PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=canary ./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
HOST_PORT=3233 DATA_DIR=./data/release-smoke-stable PAPERCLIPAI_VERSION=latest ./scripts/docker-onboard-smoke.sh
```
Automated browser smoke is also available:
```bash
gh workflow run release-smoke.yml -f paperclip_version=canary
gh workflow run release-smoke.yml -f paperclip_version=latest
```
Minimum checks:
- `npx paperclipai@canary onboard` installs
- onboarding completes without crashes
- authenticated login works with the smoke credentials
- the browser lands in onboarding on a fresh instance
- company creation succeeds
- the first CEO agent is created
- the first CEO heartbeat run is triggered
## Rollback
Rollback does not unpublish versions.
It only moves the `latest` dist-tag back to a previous stable:
```bash
./scripts/rollback-latest.sh 2026.318.0 --dry-run
./scripts/rollback-latest.sh 2026.318.0
```
Then fix forward with a new stable patch slot or release date.
## Failure Playbooks
### If the canary publishes but smoke testing fails
Do not run stable.
Instead:
1. fix the issue on `master`
2. merge the fix
3. wait for the next automatic canary
4. rerun smoke testing
### If stable npm publish succeeds but tag push or GitHub release creation fails
This is a partial release. npm is already live.
Do this immediately:
1. push the missing tag
2. rerun `PUBLISH_REMOTE=public-gh ./scripts/create-github-release.sh YYYY.MDD.P`
3. verify the GitHub Release notes point at `releases/vYYYY.MDD.P.md`
Do not republish the same version.
### If `latest` is broken after stable publish
Roll back the dist-tag:
```bash
./scripts/rollback-latest.sh YYYY.MDD.P
```
Then fix forward with a new stable release.
## Related Files
- [`scripts/release.sh`](../scripts/release.sh)
- [`scripts/release-package-map.mjs`](../scripts/release-package-map.mjs)
- [`scripts/create-github-release.sh`](../scripts/create-github-release.sh)
- [`scripts/rollback-latest.sh`](../scripts/rollback-latest.sh)
- [`doc/PUBLISHING.md`](PUBLISHING.md)
- [`doc/RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md`](RELEASE-AUTOMATION-SETUP.md)
Reference in new issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink