Devin Foley
a4fa0eaf5e
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies, and `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` is the public intake for bugs and feature work > - PR #7575 (just merged) shipped a first cut of `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/`: bug / feature / adapter forms plus a chooser config that disables blank issues — enough to stop greeting filers with an empty textarea > - Reviewing [PR #4189](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/4189) surfaced additional, complementary items worth landing now rather than later: PII handling (logs and config paste fields routinely contain agent transcripts, encrypted-secrets paths, and tokens), richer environment capture for bugs (install method, adapters, DB mode, access context), and a subsystem picker on feature/enhancement so the queue can be filtered by area > - Items 7–10 from #4189 (CONTRIBUTING.md change, AGENTS.md §11, `require-issue-link.yml`, GitHub Discussions contact link) are intentionally deferred — each is its own decision and belongs in a separate, focused PR > - The auto-label workflow that earlier revisions of this branch included was dropped per reviewer feedback — labeling on issue open is a separate concern from the template content and should land (if at all) in its own PR > - This pull request extends the merged templates with PII warnings + a mandatory privacy checkbox on `bug_report.yml`, additional optional env fields, a required subsystem dropdown on `feature_request.yml`, and two net-new templates (`enhancement.yml`, `docs_issue.yml`) > - The benefit is that newly filed issues land with enough environment context and subsystem hint to triage on first read, and paste-field PII is gated by an explicit reviewer-readable checkbox ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #7575 PAPA-521 (follow-up). This is the second half of the issue-templates work — PR #7575 shipped the baseline, this PR adopts items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 from PR #4189 on top. Item 5 (auto-label workflow) was dropped per reviewer feedback. ## What Changed - `bug_report.yml` — added PII privacy notice with redaction guidance and anonymizer links; pre-submission preflight checkboxes; optional fields for install method, adapter checkbox list (Claude Code / Codex / Cursor / Droid / Hermes / external plugin / core), database mode (PGlite / external Postgres), and access context (board / agent); inline PII warnings on the logs and config paste fields; mandatory privacy checklist at submission time - `feature_request.yml` — added a required subsystem dropdown (`server/` · `ui/` · `packages/db` · `packages/shared` · `packages/adapters` · `packages/plugins` · cross-cutting · unsure) - `enhancement.yml` — new template for improvements to existing behaviour, with current-vs-proposed-behaviour fields and a required breaking-changes field - `docs_issue.yml` — new lightweight doc-issue form (type / location / description / suggestion) No workflow changes in this PR. ## Verification - All 4 changed YAML files round-trip through `js-yaml` cleanly - Diff vs. master: 4 files changed, +254/-3 (`.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/` only) - Post-merge reviewer steps: 1. Visit `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/issues/new/choose` — expect five template cards (bug, feature, enhancement, adapter, docs) and the existing Discord/Roadmap contact links; no "Open a blank issue" option 2. Open each template in turn — required fields should block submission when empty (in particular: privacy checklist on the bug form, subsystem dropdown on feature/enhancement, breaking-changes field on enhancement) ## Risks - Low risk overall. Files are `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/` config only — no runtime effect on the server, UI, CLI, or any package, and no workflows touched - If a YAML form has a schema quirk that `js-yaml` accepts but GitHub's form renderer rejects, GitHub silently falls back to a blank issue for that template. The reviewer render check above is the mitigation > 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 Claude Opus 4.7 — provider Anthropic, exact model ID `claude-opus-4-7`, extended-thinking + tool use, running inside the Paperclip Claude Code harness. ## 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 (refs #7575, #4189) - [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 run tests locally and they pass (n/a — `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/` content only; `js-yaml` parse check run instead) - [ ] I have added or updated tests where applicable (n/a — repo has no test coverage for `.github/` content) - [ ] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots (n/a — only the GitHub.com "New issue" page is affected; render check happens post-merge on github.com) - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (will verify after open) - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups (greploop will run after open) - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge
54 lines
1.9 KiB
YAML
54 lines
1.9 KiB
YAML
name: Feature request
|
|
description: Propose a new capability or improvement
|
|
labels: [enhancement]
|
|
body:
|
|
- type: markdown
|
|
attributes:
|
|
value: |
|
|
Feature work on core Paperclip is coordinated against `ROADMAP.md` and Discord `#dev`. Please skim those before filing — see [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) for the full guidance.
|
|
- type: dropdown
|
|
id: subsystem
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Subsystem affected
|
|
description: Which part of the codebase would this primarily live in?
|
|
options:
|
|
- server/ — REST API & orchestration services
|
|
- ui/ — React + Vite board UI
|
|
- packages/db — Drizzle schema, migrations
|
|
- packages/shared — types, constants, validators, API paths
|
|
- packages/adapters — agent adapter implementations
|
|
- packages/plugins — plugin system
|
|
- Cross-cutting (multiple of the above)
|
|
- Unsure
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: problem
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Problem or motivation
|
|
description: What are you trying to do that is currently difficult or impossible?
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: solution
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Proposed solution
|
|
description: Describe the feature you'd like. How should it work?
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: alternatives
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Alternatives considered
|
|
description: Other approaches you thought about and why you ruled them out.
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: roadmap
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Roadmap alignment
|
|
description: Does this relate to anything in `ROADMAP.md`? Link the relevant section if so.
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: context
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Additional context
|
|
description: Mockups, examples from other tools, related issues, etc.
|