mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-02 02:07:25 +08:00
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
0dc8d80eea
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Managed worktrees can prepare an isolated Paperclip development instance. > - The built-in provisioner requires a canonical registered seed source config. > - A missing source currently has the same message as a rejected symlink or non-regular file. > - This pull request separates those messages and names the supported setup choices. > - Operators can choose the intended setup without changing the source-validation guards. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A plain repository checkout can select the control-plane instance as its seed source. If that instance runs with environment-only configuration, the source config file can be unavailable. The provisioner stops with a message that also covers noncanonical files and gives no repair guidance. **Expected behavior** The error should identify the selected source and distinguish an unavailable prerequisite from a rejected file. It should explain that a seeded development instance needs a canonical registered source. It should describe the explicit no-op only for a checkout-only worktree. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Use a plain base checkout with no repository-local config. 2. Leave the control-plane instance config file absent. 3. Run the built-in worktree provisioner against an isolated checkout. **Paperclip version or commit** Base commit `c8f874311c`. **Deployment mode** Managed local worktrees, including servers configured only through environment variables. Related: #11733 adds deeper source-readiness checks. #11735 changes runtime and seed lifecycle handling. This change only improves the existing shell guard's diagnostics. ## What Changed - Distinguish unavailable source configs from symlinks and non-regular files. - Identify whether the selected source belongs to the base workspace or control-plane instance. - Explain seeded-instance prerequisites and the explicit checkout-only setup choice. - Verify failure still precedes target-state creation and CLI invocation. - Document the setup choice and its runtime-readiness limit. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/provision-worktree-self-heal.test.mjs`: 21 passed; one platform-gated test skipped because macOS lacks `flock`. - `bash -n scripts/provision-worktree.sh` and `git diff --check`: passed. - `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run server/src/__tests__/ai-connections.test.ts`: 50 passed after running the installed PostgreSQL package's own symlink hydration script in this worktree. - `pnpm test:run`: attempted, then stopped after unrelated database suites failed at startup. The offline install had omitted PostgreSQL native library symlinks. The focused database rerun above verifies the local repair; the complete suite is delegated to CI. - `pnpm build`: passed. - [Required PR CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/36797650741) passed on `0a3ba63e12`: 50 successful checks and two intentional Storybook skips. Greptile scored that exact commit 5/5; there are zero unresolved review threads and no merge conflicts. ## Risks - Diagnostics only. This does not supply a source config or repair an existing blocked task. - The failure predicates and exit status stay unchanged. Symlink and non-regular-file errors do not recommend skipping setup. - The checkout-only no-op requires an explicit policy choice. It does not grant runtime or seed readiness. - No schema, migration, tenant policy, deployment, or Sentry reporting change. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6-based Codex, with reasoning, shell tools, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed by 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>