paperclip/server/src/__tests__/issue-comment-cancel-routes.test.ts

205 lines
6.4 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

[codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - A core part of that is the operator experience around reading issue state, agent chat, and sub-task structure > - The current branch had a long run of issue-detail and issue-list UX fixes that all improve how humans follow and steer active work > - Those changes mostly live in the UI/chat surface and should be reviewed together instead of mixed with workspace/runtime work > - This pull request packages the issue-detail, chat, markdown, and sub-issue list improvements into one standalone change > - The benefit is a cleaner, less jumpy, more reliable issue workflow on desktop and mobile without coupling it to unrelated server/runtime refactors ## What Changed - Stabilized issue chat runtime wiring, optimistic comment handling, queued-comment cancellation, and composer anchoring during live updates - Fixed several issue-detail rendering and navigation regressions including placeholder bleed, local polling scope, mobile inbox-to-issue transitions, and visible refresh resets - Improved markdown and rich-content handling with advisory image normalization, editor fallback behavior, touch mention recovery, and `issue:` quicklook links - Refined sub-issue behavior with parent-derived defaults, current-user inheritance fixes, empty-state cleanup, and a reusable issue-list presentation for sub-issues - Added targeted UI tests for the new issue-detail, chat scroll/message, placeholder-data, markdown, and issue-list behaviors ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-scroll.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts ui/src/lib/query-placeholder-data.test.tsx ui/src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx` ## Risks - Medium: this branch touches the highest-traffic issue-detail UI paths, so regressions would show up as chat/thread or sub-issue UX glitches - The changes are UI-heavy and would benefit from reviewer screenshots or a quick manual browser pass before merge ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution enabled ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
import express from "express";
import request from "supertest";
import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
const mockIssueService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
getById: vi.fn(),
assertCheckoutOwner: vi.fn(),
getComment: vi.fn(),
removeComment: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockAccessService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
canUser: vi.fn(),
hasPermission: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockHeartbeatService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
getRun: vi.fn(async () => null),
getActiveRunForAgent: vi.fn(async () => null),
}));
const mockLogActivity = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn(async () => undefined));
vi.mock("@paperclipai/shared/telemetry", () => ({
trackAgentTaskCompleted: vi.fn(),
trackErrorHandlerCrash: vi.fn(),
}));
vi.mock("../telemetry.js", () => ({
getTelemetryClient: vi.fn(() => ({ track: vi.fn() })),
}));
vi.mock("../services/index.js", () => ({
accessService: () => mockAccessService,
agentService: () => ({ getById: vi.fn(async () => null) }),
documentService: () => ({}),
executionWorkspaceService: () => ({}),
feedbackService: () => ({
listIssueVotesForUser: vi.fn(async () => []),
saveIssueVote: vi.fn(async () => ({ vote: null, consentEnabledNow: false, sharingEnabled: false })),
}),
goalService: () => ({}),
heartbeatService: () => mockHeartbeatService,
instanceSettingsService: () => ({
get: vi.fn(async () => ({
id: "instance-settings-1",
general: {
censorUsernameInLogs: false,
feedbackDataSharingPreference: "prompt",
},
})),
listCompanyIds: vi.fn(async () => ["company-1"]),
}),
issueApprovalService: () => ({}),
Add first-class issue references (#4214) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Operators and agents coordinate through company-scoped issues, comments, documents, and task relationships. > - Issue text can mention other tickets, but those references were previously plain markdown/text without durable relationship data. > - That made it harder to understand related work, surface backlinks, and keep cross-ticket context visible in the board. > - This pull request adds first-class issue reference extraction, storage, API responses, and UI surfaces. > - The benefit is that issue references become queryable, navigable, and visible without relying on ad hoc text scanning. ## What Changed - Added shared issue-reference parsing utilities and exported reference-related types/constants. - Added an `issue_reference_mentions` table, idempotent migration DDL, schema exports, and database documentation. - Added server-side issue reference services, route integration, activity summaries, and a backfill command for existing issue content. - Added UI reference pills, related-work panels, markdown/editor mention handling, and issue detail/property rendering updates. - Added focused shared, server, and UI tests for parsing, persistence, display, and related-work behavior. - Rebased `PAP-735-first-class-task-references` cleanly onto `public-gh/master`; no `pnpm-lock.yaml` changes are included. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm test:run packages/shared/src/issue-references.test.ts server/src/__tests__/issue-references-service.test.ts ui/src/components/IssueRelatedWorkPanel.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssueProperties.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownBody.test.tsx` ## Risks - Medium risk because this adds a new issue-reference persistence path that touches shared parsing, database schema, server routes, and UI rendering. - Migration risk is mitigated by `CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS`, guarded foreign-key creation, and `CREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS` statements so users who have applied an older local version of the numbered migration can re-run safely. - UI risk is limited by focused component coverage, but reviewers should still manually inspect issue detail pages containing ticket references before merge. > 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-based coding agent, tool-using shell workflow with repository inspection, git rebase/push, typecheck, and focused Vitest verification. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: dotta <dotta@example.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-21 10:02:52 -05:00
issueReferenceService: () => ({
deleteDocumentSource: async () => undefined,
diffIssueReferenceSummary: () => ({
addedReferencedIssues: [],
removedReferencedIssues: [],
currentReferencedIssues: [],
}),
emptySummary: () => ({ outbound: [], inbound: [] }),
listIssueReferenceSummary: async () => ({ outbound: [], inbound: [] }),
syncComment: async () => undefined,
syncDocument: async () => undefined,
syncIssue: async () => undefined,
}),
[codex] Improve issue detail and issue-list UX (#3678) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies > - A core part of that is the operator experience around reading issue state, agent chat, and sub-task structure > - The current branch had a long run of issue-detail and issue-list UX fixes that all improve how humans follow and steer active work > - Those changes mostly live in the UI/chat surface and should be reviewed together instead of mixed with workspace/runtime work > - This pull request packages the issue-detail, chat, markdown, and sub-issue list improvements into one standalone change > - The benefit is a cleaner, less jumpy, more reliable issue workflow on desktop and mobile without coupling it to unrelated server/runtime refactors ## What Changed - Stabilized issue chat runtime wiring, optimistic comment handling, queued-comment cancellation, and composer anchoring during live updates - Fixed several issue-detail rendering and navigation regressions including placeholder bleed, local polling scope, mobile inbox-to-issue transitions, and visible refresh resets - Improved markdown and rich-content handling with advisory image normalization, editor fallback behavior, touch mention recovery, and `issue:` quicklook links - Refined sub-issue behavior with parent-derived defaults, current-user inheritance fixes, empty-state cleanup, and a reusable issue-list presentation for sub-issues - Added targeted UI tests for the new issue-detail, chat scroll/message, placeholder-data, markdown, and issue-list behaviors ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run ui/src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx ui/src/components/MarkdownEditor.test.tsx ui/src/components/IssuesList.test.tsx ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.test.tsx ui/src/lib/issue-chat-messages.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-chat-scroll.test.ts ui/src/lib/issue-detail-subissues.test.ts ui/src/lib/query-placeholder-data.test.tsx ui/src/hooks/usePaperclipIssueRuntime.test.tsx` ## Risks - Medium: this branch touches the highest-traffic issue-detail UI paths, so regressions would show up as chat/thread or sub-issue UX glitches - The changes are UI-heavy and would benefit from reviewer screenshots or a quick manual browser pass before merge ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex coding agent (GPT-5-class runtime in Codex CLI; exact deployed model ID is not exposed in this environment), reasoning enabled, tool use and local code execution enabled ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-04-14 12:50:48 -05:00
issueService: () => mockIssueService,
logActivity: mockLogActivity,
projectService: () => ({}),
routineService: () => ({ syncRunStatusForIssue: vi.fn(async () => undefined) }),
workProductService: () => ({}),
}));
function createApp() {
const app = express();
app.use(express.json());
return app;
}
async function installActor(app: express.Express, actor?: Record<string, unknown>) {
const [{ issueRoutes }, { errorHandler }] = await Promise.all([
import("../routes/issues.js"),
import("../middleware/index.js"),
]);
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
(req as any).actor = actor ?? {
type: "board",
userId: "local-board",
companyIds: ["company-1"],
source: "local_implicit",
isInstanceAdmin: false,
};
next();
});
app.use("/api", issueRoutes({} as any, {} as any));
app.use(errorHandler);
return app;
}
function makeIssue() {
return {
id: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
companyId: "company-1",
status: "in_progress",
assigneeAgentId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
assigneeUserId: null,
executionRunId: "run-1",
identifier: "PAP-1353",
title: "Queued cancel",
};
}
function makeComment(overrides: Record<string, unknown> = {}) {
return {
id: "comment-1",
companyId: "company-1",
issueId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
authorAgentId: null,
authorUserId: "local-board",
body: "Queued follow-up",
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:01:00.000Z"),
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:01:00.000Z"),
...overrides,
};
}
describe("issue comment cancel routes", () => {
beforeEach(() => {
vi.resetModules();
vi.resetAllMocks();
mockIssueService.getById.mockResolvedValue(makeIssue());
mockIssueService.assertCheckoutOwner.mockResolvedValue({ adoptedFromRunId: null });
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(makeComment());
mockIssueService.removeComment.mockResolvedValue(makeComment());
mockAccessService.canUser.mockResolvedValue(false);
mockAccessService.hasPermission.mockResolvedValue(false);
mockHeartbeatService.getRun.mockResolvedValue({
id: "run-1",
companyId: "company-1",
agentId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
status: "running",
startedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T15:00:00.000Z"),
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:59:00.000Z"),
});
mockHeartbeatService.getActiveRunForAgent.mockResolvedValue(null);
mockLogActivity.mockResolvedValue(undefined);
});
it("cancels a queued comment from its author and restores the deleted body", async () => {
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(res.body).toMatchObject({
id: "comment-1",
body: "Queued follow-up",
});
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).toHaveBeenCalledWith("comment-1");
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.anything(),
expect.objectContaining({
action: "issue.comment_cancelled",
details: expect.objectContaining({
commentId: "comment-1",
source: "queue_cancel",
queueTargetRunId: "run-1",
}),
}),
);
});
it("rejects canceling comments that are no longer queued", async () => {
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(
makeComment({
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:58:00.000Z"),
updatedAt: new Date("2026-04-11T14:58:00.000Z"),
}),
);
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
expect(res.status).toBe(409);
expect(res.body.error).toBe("Only queued comments can be canceled");
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects canceling another actor's queued comment", async () => {
mockIssueService.getComment.mockResolvedValue(
makeComment({
authorUserId: "someone-else",
}),
);
const res = await request(await installActor(createApp()))
.delete("/api/issues/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111/comments/comment-1");
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(res.body.error).toBe("Only the comment author can cancel queued comments");
expect(mockIssueService.removeComment).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
});