[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
import { randomUUID } from "node:crypto";
|
|
|
|
|
import { eq, inArray } from "drizzle-orm";
|
|
|
|
|
import { afterAll, afterEach, beforeAll, describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
import {
|
|
|
|
|
agents,
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
agentWakeupRequests,
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
companies,
|
|
|
|
|
createDb,
|
|
|
|
|
heartbeatRuns,
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
issueComments,
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
issueTreeHoldMembers,
|
|
|
|
|
issueTreeHolds,
|
|
|
|
|
issues,
|
|
|
|
|
} from "@paperclipai/db";
|
|
|
|
|
import {
|
|
|
|
|
getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport,
|
|
|
|
|
startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase,
|
|
|
|
|
} from "./helpers/embedded-postgres.js";
|
|
|
|
|
import { issueTreeControlService } from "../services/issue-tree-control.js";
|
|
|
|
|
import { issueService } from "../services/issues.js";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const embeddedPostgresSupport = await getEmbeddedPostgresTestSupport();
|
|
|
|
|
const describeEmbeddedPostgres = embeddedPostgresSupport.supported ? describe : describe.skip;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!embeddedPostgresSupport.supported) {
|
|
|
|
|
console.warn(
|
|
|
|
|
`Skipping embedded Postgres issue tree control service tests on this host: ${embeddedPostgresSupport.reason ?? "unsupported environment"}`,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describeEmbeddedPostgres("issueTreeControlService", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
let db!: ReturnType<typeof createDb>;
|
|
|
|
|
let tempDb: Awaited<ReturnType<typeof startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase>> | null = null;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beforeAll(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
tempDb = await startEmbeddedPostgresTestDatabase("paperclip-issue-tree-control-");
|
|
|
|
|
db = createDb(tempDb.connectionString);
|
|
|
|
|
}, 20_000);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterEach(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueTreeHoldMembers);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueTreeHolds);
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(issueComments);
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(issues);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(heartbeatRuns);
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(agentWakeupRequests);
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.delete(agents);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.delete(companies);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterAll(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await tempDb?.cleanup();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("previews a subtree without changing issue statuses", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const otherCompanyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const runId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const runningChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const doneChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const cancelledChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: otherCompanyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "OtherCo",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${otherCompanyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "CodexCoder",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "running",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(heartbeatRuns).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: runId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "assignment",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "running",
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: { issueId: runningChildId },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: runningChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Running child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: runId,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:01:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: doneChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Done child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "done",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:02:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: cancelledChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Cancelled child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "cancelled",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:03:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const svc = issueTreeControlService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
const preview = await svc.preview(companyId, rootIssueId, { mode: "pause" });
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(preview.issues.map((issue) => [issue.id, issue.depth, issue.skipped, issue.skipReason])).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
[rootIssueId, 0, false, null],
|
|
|
|
|
[runningChildId, 1, false, null],
|
|
|
|
|
[doneChildId, 1, true, "terminal_status"],
|
|
|
|
|
[cancelledChildId, 1, true, "terminal_status"],
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(preview.totals).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
totalIssues: 4,
|
|
|
|
|
affectedIssues: 2,
|
|
|
|
|
skippedIssues: 2,
|
|
|
|
|
activeRuns: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
queuedRuns: 0,
|
|
|
|
|
affectedAgents: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(preview.countsByStatus).toMatchObject({ todo: 1, in_progress: 1, done: 1, cancelled: 1 });
|
|
|
|
|
expect(preview.activeRuns).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
expect.objectContaining({ id: runId, issueId: runningChildId, agentId, status: "running" }),
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(preview.warnings.map((warning) => warning.code)).toContain("running_runs_present");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const [runningChildAfterPreview] = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select()
|
|
|
|
|
.from(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(issues.id, runningChildId));
|
|
|
|
|
expect(runningChildAfterPreview.status).toBe("in_progress");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await expect(svc.preview(otherCompanyId, rootIssueId, { mode: "pause" })).rejects.toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
status: 404,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("creates and releases normalized hold snapshots", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const svc = issueTreeControlService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
const created = await svc.createHold(companyId, rootIssueId, {
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "operator requested pause",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(created.hold.status).toBe("active");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(created.hold.members).toHaveLength(1);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(created.hold.members?.[0]).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueStatus: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
skipped: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const released = await svc.releaseHold(companyId, rootIssueId, created.hold.id, {
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "operator resumed",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(released.status).toBe("released");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(released.releaseReason).toBe("operator resumed");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(released.members).toHaveLength(1);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("cancels non-terminal issue statuses and restores from the cancel snapshot", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const runningChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const todoChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const doneChildId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "done",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: runningChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Running child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "in_progress",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:01:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: todoChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Todo child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:02:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: doneChildId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Done child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "done",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-04-21T10:03:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const svc = issueTreeControlService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
const cancel = await svc.createHold(companyId, rootIssueId, {
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "cancel",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "bad plan",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(cancel.preview.issues.map((issue) => [issue.id, issue.skipped, issue.skipReason])).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
[rootIssueId, true, "terminal_status"],
|
|
|
|
|
[runningChildId, false, null],
|
|
|
|
|
[todoChildId, false, null],
|
|
|
|
|
[doneChildId, true, "terminal_status"],
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const cancelled = await svc.cancelIssueStatusesForHold(companyId, rootIssueId, cancel.hold.id);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(cancelled.updatedIssueIds.sort()).toEqual([runningChildId, todoChildId].sort());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const afterCancel = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ id: issues.id, status: issues.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(inArray(issues.id, [runningChildId, todoChildId, doneChildId]));
|
|
|
|
|
expect(Object.fromEntries(afterCancel.map((issue) => [issue.id, issue.status]))).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
[runningChildId]: "cancelled",
|
|
|
|
|
[todoChildId]: "cancelled",
|
|
|
|
|
[doneChildId]: "done",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db
|
|
|
|
|
.update(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.set({ status: "blocked", cancelledAt: null, updatedAt: new Date() })
|
|
|
|
|
.where(eq(issues.id, todoChildId));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const restorePreview = await svc.preview(companyId, rootIssueId, { mode: "restore" });
|
|
|
|
|
expect(restorePreview.issues.map((issue) => [issue.id, issue.skipped, issue.skipReason])).toEqual([
|
|
|
|
|
[rootIssueId, true, "not_cancelled"],
|
|
|
|
|
[runningChildId, false, null],
|
|
|
|
|
[todoChildId, true, "changed_after_cancel"],
|
|
|
|
|
[doneChildId, true, "not_cancelled"],
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(restorePreview.warnings.map((warning) => warning.code)).toContain("restore_conflicts_present");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const restore = await svc.createHold(companyId, rootIssueId, {
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "restore",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "resume useful work",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
const restored = await svc.restoreIssueStatusesForHold(companyId, rootIssueId, restore.hold.id, {
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "resume useful work",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
expect(restored.updatedIssueIds).toEqual([runningChildId]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const afterRestore = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ id: issues.id, status: issues.status, checkoutRunId: issues.checkoutRunId, executionRunId: issues.executionRunId })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(issues)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(inArray(issues.id, [runningChildId, todoChildId, doneChildId]));
|
|
|
|
|
expect(Object.fromEntries(afterRestore.map((issue) => [issue.id, issue.status]))).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
[runningChildId]: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
[todoChildId]: "blocked",
|
|
|
|
|
[doneChildId]: "done",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const holds = await db
|
|
|
|
|
.select({ id: issueTreeHolds.id, mode: issueTreeHolds.mode, status: issueTreeHolds.status })
|
|
|
|
|
.from(issueTreeHolds)
|
|
|
|
|
.where(inArray(issueTreeHolds.id, [cancel.hold.id, restore.hold.id]));
|
|
|
|
|
expect(Object.fromEntries(holds.map((hold) => [hold.mode, hold.status]))).toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
cancel: "released",
|
|
|
|
|
restore: "released",
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("blocks normal checkout but allows comment interaction checkout under a pause hold", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const companyId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const agentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const childIssueId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootRunId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const childRunId = randomUUID();
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
const forgedRunId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootWakeupRequestId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const childWakeupRequestId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const forgedWakeupRequestId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const rootCommentId = randomUUID();
|
|
|
|
|
const childCommentId = randomUUID();
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(companies).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Paperclip",
|
|
|
|
|
issuePrefix: `T${companyId.replace(/-/g, "").slice(0, 6).toUpperCase()}`,
|
|
|
|
|
requireBoardApprovalForNewAgents: false,
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agents).values({
|
|
|
|
|
id: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
name: "SecurityEngineer",
|
|
|
|
|
role: "engineer",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterType: "codex_local",
|
|
|
|
|
adapterConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
runtimeConfig: {},
|
|
|
|
|
permissions: {},
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(issues).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Paused root",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: childIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
parentId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
title: "Paused child",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
priority: "medium",
|
|
|
|
|
assigneeAgentId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.insert(issueComments).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
authorUserId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Please answer this root issue question.",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: childIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
authorUserId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
body: "Please answer this child issue question.",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
await db.insert(agentWakeupRequests).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: rootIssueId, commentId: rootCommentId },
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "user",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
runId: rootRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: forgedWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "on_demand",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "manual",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: childIssueId, commentId: childCommentId },
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
runId: forgedRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: childWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
payload: { issueId: childIssueId, commentId: childCommentId },
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorType: "user",
|
|
|
|
|
requestedByActorId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
runId: childRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
await db.insert(heartbeatRuns).values([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: rootRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
wakeupRequestId: rootWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
commentId: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeCommentId: rootCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "issue.comment",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: forgedRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "on_demand",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "manual",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
|
|
|
|
wakeupRequestId: forgedWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: childIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
commentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeCommentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: childRunId,
|
|
|
|
|
companyId,
|
|
|
|
|
agentId,
|
|
|
|
|
invocationSource: "automation",
|
|
|
|
|
triggerDetail: "system",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "queued",
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
wakeupRequestId: childWakeupRequestId,
|
|
|
|
|
contextSnapshot: {
|
|
|
|
|
issueId: childIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeReason: "issue_commented",
|
|
|
|
|
commentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
wakeCommentId: childCommentId,
|
|
|
|
|
source: "issue.comment",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const treeSvc = issueTreeControlService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
await treeSvc.createHold(companyId, rootIssueId, {
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "operator requested pause",
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const issueSvc = issueService(db);
|
|
|
|
|
await expect(issueSvc.checkout(childIssueId, agentId, ["todo"], randomUUID())).rejects.toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
status: 409,
|
|
|
|
|
details: expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
2026-04-24 15:50:32 -05:00
|
|
|
await expect(issueSvc.checkout(childIssueId, agentId, ["todo"], forgedRunId)).rejects.toMatchObject({
|
|
|
|
|
status: 409,
|
|
|
|
|
details: expect.objectContaining({
|
|
|
|
|
rootIssueId,
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
[codex] Add issue subtree pause, cancel, and restore controls (#4332)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies.
> - This branch extends the issue control-plane so board operators can
pause, cancel, and later restore whole issue subtrees while keeping
descendant execution and wake behavior coherent.
> - That required new hold state in the database, shared contracts,
server routes/services, and issue detail UI controls so subtree actions
are durable and auditable instead of ad hoc.
> - While this branch was in flight, `master` advanced with new
environment lifecycle work, including a new `0065_environments`
migration.
> - Before opening the PR, this branch had to be rebased onto
`paperclipai/paperclip:master` without losing the existing
subtree-control work or leaving conflicting migration numbering behind.
> - This pull request rebases the subtree pause/cancel/restore feature
cleanly onto current `master`, renumbers the hold migration to
`0066_issue_tree_holds`, and preserves the full branch diff in a single
PR.
> - The benefit is that reviewers get one clean, mergeable PR for the
subtree-control feature instead of stale branch history with migration
conflicts.
## What Changed
- Added durable issue subtree hold data structures, shared
API/types/validators, server routes/services, and UI flows for subtree
pause, cancel, and restore operations.
- Added server and UI coverage for subtree previewing, hold
creation/release, dependency-aware scheduling under holds, and issue
detail subtree controls.
- Rebased the branch onto current `paperclipai/paperclip:master` and
renumbered the branch migration from `0065_issue_tree_holds` to
`0066_issue_tree_holds` so it no longer conflicts with upstream
`0065_environments`.
- Added a small follow-up commit that makes restore requests return `200
OK` explicitly while keeping pause/cancel hold creation at `201
Created`, and updated the route test to match that contract.
## Verification
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/db typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck`
- `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck`
- `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-routes.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service.test.ts
src/__tests__/issue-tree-control-service-unit.test.ts
src/__tests__/heartbeat-dependency-scheduling.test.ts`
- `cd ui && pnpm exec vitest run src/components/IssueChatThread.test.tsx
src/pages/IssueDetail.test.tsx`
## Risks
- This is a broad cross-layer change touching DB/schema, shared
contracts, server orchestration, and UI; regressions are most likely
around subtree status restoration or wake suppression/resume edge cases.
- The migration was renumbered during PR prep to avoid the new upstream
`0065_environments` conflict. Reviewers should confirm the final
`0066_issue_tree_holds` ordering is the only hold-related migration that
lands.
- The issue-tree restore endpoint now responds with `200` instead of
relying on implicit behavior, which is semantically better for a restore
operation but still changes an API detail that clients or tests could
have assumed.
> 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 agent in the Paperclip Codex runtime (GPT-5-class
tool-using coding model; exact deployment ID/context window is not
exposed inside 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 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>
2026-04-23 14:51:46 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const checkedOutChild = await issueSvc.checkout(childIssueId, agentId, ["todo"], childRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutChild.status).toBe("in_progress");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutChild.checkoutRunId).toBe(childRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const checkedOutRoot = await issueSvc.checkout(rootIssueId, agentId, ["todo"], rootRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutRoot.status).toBe("in_progress");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutRoot.checkoutRunId).toBe(rootRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await db.update(issues).set({
|
|
|
|
|
status: "todo",
|
|
|
|
|
checkoutRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionRunId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionAgentNameKey: null,
|
|
|
|
|
executionLockedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date(),
|
|
|
|
|
}).where(eq(issues.id, rootIssueId));
|
|
|
|
|
await db.update(issueTreeHolds).set({
|
|
|
|
|
status: "released",
|
|
|
|
|
releasedAt: new Date(),
|
|
|
|
|
releasedByActorType: "user",
|
|
|
|
|
releasedByUserId: "board-user",
|
|
|
|
|
releaseReason: "switch to full pause",
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date(),
|
|
|
|
|
}).where(eq(issueTreeHolds.rootIssueId, rootIssueId));
|
|
|
|
|
await treeSvc.createHold(companyId, rootIssueId, {
|
|
|
|
|
mode: "pause",
|
|
|
|
|
reason: "full pause",
|
|
|
|
|
releasePolicy: { strategy: "manual", note: "full_pause" },
|
|
|
|
|
actor: { actorType: "user", actorId: "board-user", userId: "board-user" },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const checkedOutLegacyFullPauseRoot = await issueSvc.checkout(rootIssueId, agentId, ["todo"], rootRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutLegacyFullPauseRoot.status).toBe("in_progress");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(checkedOutLegacyFullPauseRoot.checkoutRunId).toBe(rootRunId);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|