mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-08 01:57:31 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
ecc253b73d
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip helps people manage AI agents at work. > - Remote workspaces need a verified saved archive. > - A failed capture must retain a safe cause for diagnosis. > - The codec and capture wrapper erased known validation and filesystem failures. > - The one-shot output fix in #18888 preserves only the existing disk and Git messages. > - This PR retains a closed set of capture failures without exposing workspace data. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18888. **What happened?** Remote archive capture can still report only `remote_workspace_operation_failed`. This was observed after the public revision `f211d44c00fbc31d22e7ff687e22dfa05643da2a` included #18888. That observation identifies the capture stage. It does not identify the underlying failure. The real local codec gives a specific validation error for an escaping symlink. Node also gives a specific errno when an archive is missing. The capture wrapper erased both causes. The codec sent raw filesystem paths to its parent process before that wrapper discarded them. **Expected behavior** Retain exact, fixed capture validation and filesystem classes. Keep arbitrary messages, paths, filenames, file contents, and command output private. **Steps to reproduce** Call the real capture transport with an escaping symlink. Separately, create a canonical capture receipt whose archive is missing. Both fail with the generic transport message on unchanged master. The new tests use real Node processes and files. ## What Changed - Add a self-contained classifier for fixed capture validation messages and a finite Node errno set. - Redact unknown codec capture errors. Preserve recognized classes through helper installation, capture, and split or combined command output. - Keep the existing disk and unfinished-Git messages first. Keep other command behavior and all save, retry, ownership, Stop, and permission policy unchanged. - Document the diagnostic contract. ## Verification Node 24.22.2, pnpm 9.15.4, macOS arm64, isolated source checkout. - Six new real-process cases failed before production edits. The same six passed after the repair. - The complete archive and transport family passed **93/93**, with no skips. A new contract test covers every capture-side reason in the actual serialized codec; an unlisted-reason mutation fails that test. - These tests cover real symlink rejection, missing canonical archive, serialized-helper ENOENT/EEXIST redaction, unchanged source bytes and canonical receipt, unknown errno, malformed output, other command stages, and the successful capture/restore path. - A safety test caught a regression in the first patch: early redaction hid a Git child's existing disk-full signal. Unchanged master passed both split/combined cases; the first patch failed both. The final family passes both after the same closed disk recognition was restored. The earlier failure remains recorded. - Full recursive typecheck and `pnpm build` passed on the current head with Node 24.22.2. - A fresh probe of the current head's compiled `server/dist` artifact passed. It ran nine real Node commands with combined one-shot output. It checked both fixed failure classes, unchanged source/receipt bytes, and a successful capture, hash check, cold restore, and scoped cleanup. - The first head's full local `pnpm test:run` failed one unchanged GitHub fast-response streaming-quarantine acknowledgement assertion: an acknowledgement appeared where the test expected none. The first chat shard passed 319 cases; the second passed 323 and failed one. One bounded focused comparison passed on both that head and untouched master. It did not explain the original failure. No chat source, assertion, or timeout changed. No full local-suite pass is claimed. - All **57 current-head contexts are terminal and clean**: 53 success, two skipped, two neutral. Required [CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41781977986) gates passed. Fresh Greptile and Paperclip assessments both report **5/5** on `d7b2fcc22c75e3157e0c53bf4725e665810f2d19`, with no open review threads. The optional security scan is neutral, not an independent security assessment pass. ```sh pnpm exec vitest run server/src/services/remote-workspace-transport.test.ts server/src/services/remote-workspace-snapshot-archive.test.ts ``` This is a **diagnostic repair**. It does not establish the cause of the observed hosted failures, qualify a live provider capture, or recover the original files. No hosted resources were executed, started, changed, or retried for this PR. ## Risks The classifier can expose only a fixed message or a fixed class from its finite errno set. Unknown and altered messages keep the generic failure. Existing disk/Git priority and command-stage restrictions have explicit tests. The new classes may improve later diagnosis; they do not authorize another operation. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model build and context window are not exposed in this agent session. The agent used reasoning, terminal tools, code edits, and real Node/filesystem tests. A separate Codex agent reviewed the production diff. ## 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>