feat(stack): handle managed state across Git workspace changes - #6202
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ad503e788c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 349ac2b9c9
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b3adb8da3a
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
![depthfirst-app[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1021002?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 8e29ab2dd7
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 37bd50569b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 37bd50569b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 13f8757004
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d3ce2b8c23
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
## Summary - settle chained managed identity recovery from the latest discovery state - keep branch-scoped transitions isolated while preserving conflict evidence - preserve marker, Git config, and service error semantics across recovery races ## Context This follows PR supabase#6202 and Linear CLI-2108. It addresses confirmed pre-wiring edge cases around interrupted branch recovery, rename-plus-move settlement, folder-to-Git marker reporting, duplicated Git config values, and service shutdown races. Automatic recovery remains internal and bounded. Explicit recovery operations and fail-closed ambiguity behavior are unchanged.
## Summary Replace the managed local-stack coordination design with a smaller architecture centered on one atomic JSON document per stack, deterministic loopback ownership, and one detached supervisor. - derive stack identity from the workspace, checkout, development context, canonical local-project key, and stack name, so multiple Supabase projects inside one monorepo remain isolated - keep automatic ports sticky per stack while respecting configured exact ports and deterministic control endpoints - support detached start, later-process reattachment, stop, deletion, and recovery after interrupted lifecycle operations - keep Docker and native execution behind the same Effect-native `@supabase/stack` package - report running configuration drift without rebinding live services ## Why The previous implementation spread these guarantees across SQLite, repository adapters, claims and publication protocols, transition state machines, operation polling, and a large contract-fixture corpus. Those layers duplicated ownership and recovery responsibilities and made ordinary user journeys difficult to follow. The simplified model gives each invariant one owner: - the stack document owns durable identity, sticky ports, lifecycle, launch metadata, and runtime metadata - the deterministic loopback endpoint owns process exclusivity and reattachment - the manager owns identity resolution, port planning, persistence, and repair - the supervisor owns runtime resources from reservation through shutdown ## Identity and monorepos A stack key combines workspace ID, checkout ID, development-context ID, canonical local-project key, and stack name. The local-project key is the canonical project path relative to its Git worktree, or `.` for an ordinary non-Git folder. It is local identity only: it is not a remote project reference or a config `project_id`. This keeps sibling Supabase projects in one repository independent, keeps the same relative project isolated across worktrees, and preserves identity when a whole worktree moves. Renaming a project directory deliberately creates a new local identity. ## Lifecycle and ports Automatic allocations avoid the deterministic control namespace and remain sticky. Explicit exact ports remain usable, including inside that namespace, unless they collide with a known stack control endpoint or an actual listener. A future identity with no document can theoretically derive an endpoint already used as an exact service port; that low-probability collision fails at control acquisition rather than requiring a global registry or forbidding 22,768 legitimate configured ports. Exact durable reservations and automatic runtime reservations are combined behind one scoped lease while each child lease receives only the fields it owns. This keeps placeholders held until the corresponding service binds without leaking ownership assumptions across allocation strategies. Startup, attachment, early stop, stop-during-start, start-during-stop, owner death, concurrent shutdown, deletion, and stale lifecycle recovery share one bounded ownership protocol. Node and Bun route stop through the same daemon shutdown transaction. Store listing degrades corrupt or unreadable entries independently, and read-only project discovery treats unsupported Git metadata as no managed stacks while mutating operations still fail loudly. Moved checkouts can be repaired through the package API while preserving identity and ports; duplicate checkout adoption remains intentionally unsupported. ## Deliberate boundaries - the managed document format is unreleased, so this change does not add migrations or compatibility shims - loopback control-token authentication is deferred because the current localhost risk is low - a CLI repair command is deferred; the package API remains the source of truth - supervisor test runtimes live only in test helpers and are not accepted by production IPC - ordinary unit and integration suites use isolated temp state and may run concurrently; the one full-stack Functions hot-reload smoke stays in the opt-in live suite - coverage focuses on high-value manager, control, supervisor, storage, and real Git journeys ## Follow-ups - [CLI-2198](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2198) — remaining real-Git and project-root contract coverage - [CLI-2199](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2199) — control diagnostics and retry-policy cleanup - [CLI-2200](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2200) — managed list UX and nested-project deletion coverage - [CLI-2201](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2201) — later managed workspace repair workflow - [CLI-2202](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2202) — remaining runtime failure-path qualification - [CLI-2203](https://linear.app/supabase/issue/CLI-2203) — copied ordinary-folder identity detection Supersedes supabase#6202, supabase#6214, and supabase#6216
2 participants
Summary
HEAD, copied branches, and moved worktrees.Context
Managed stack identity can no longer assume that a checkout path or branch context remains stable after normal Git operations. This change keeps discovery read-only, makes identity publication and recovery atomic, and exposes explicit recovery operations when ownership cannot be proven safely. Metadata pruning remains non-destructive and scoped to records selected by discovery.