feat: remember workspace model and mode on send - #3968
Conversation
|
@codex review |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
![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: dfbedb12c4
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 feedback on #3968: - AgentContext rolls the optimistic local mode switch back when the backend write fails (unless the user re-switched meanwhile), so a client cannot silently diverge from the backend-authoritative agent. - ProposePlan handlers clear the pending agent guard when the follow-up send fails (failed Result or throw); a stuck guard would block all backend agent seeds for the workspace. --- _Generated with `xum` • Model: `anthropic:claude-fable-5` • Thinking: `xhigh`_ <!-- xum-attribution: model=anthropic:claude-fable-5 thinking=xhigh -->
|
@codex review |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4103151aff
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: bf11f76b9d
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: cd2228a734
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: badc083c61
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@codex review |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 2d9d468281
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c53bc5bc8a
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9793b2969b
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 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9f54ba0f67
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".
ibetitsmike
changed the title
|
@codex review |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 96209923fe
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: 866d4c7d41
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".
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Chef's kiss. Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The reduced implementation has a clean Codex code/security verdict on c841243, zero unresolved review threads, passing local static checks, and 590 passing affected tests. The full CI unit job crashed inside Bun 1.3.5 twice (exit 132, native segmentation fault, no failing test assertions); the retry reached a different test before the same native crash. The first crash-site suite passes locally with coverage. I am leaving this runtime/CI blocker separate rather than expanding the persistence PR with unrelated runtime workarounds. |
c841243 to
a3f7ad8
Compare
|
@codex review Rebased the simplified send-only persistence change onto current main. The new wake-admission regression test now pauses at pricing admission because synthetic turns intentionally do not persist settings. Local static checks and all 631 affected tests pass. Please review current head a3f7ad8. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a3f7ad8ef1
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".
|
Review responses:
All 647 affected tests pass. The rebased head also completed all required CI, including Test / Unit. The broad local coverage run did not reproduce the native Bun crash, but exposed separate browser test failures being checked in isolation. No CI runtime workaround was added. |
|
@codex review The ACP load/resume fix now preserves the active draft and returns matching config options. Both paths reproduced the wrong prompt model/thinking before the fix and pass afterward; all 647 affected tests and local static checks pass. Please review the explicit client-load snapshot contract in the updated description. Per-navigation hydration and live browser settings synchronization are intentionally out of scope for this reduced implementation. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉 Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@codex review Only two CI/test fixes since the clean code/security review:
Local static checks and actionlint also pass. No additional production changes. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
1 participant
Summary
Remember each workspace's model and mode when the user sends a message, using the existing send-time persistence. Picker changes stay local. Synthetic turns and stream resumes do not replace the saved selection.
Fresh or reloaded browser clients snapshot the last submitted choices for every main workspace. A running client does not apply later backend AI settings, including for workspaces opened later in that client; reload to restore newer choices from another client. This deliberately excludes live synchronization so delayed send echoes cannot overwrite unsent choices. ACP load/resume in the same running adapter preserves its active unsent mode, model, and thinking settings; a fresh adapter restores persisted settings. ACP keeps one active draft; switching to another mode restores that mode's saved settings, without retaining a history of unsent per-mode drafts.
Removed picker-time writes, pending guards, rollback/serialization machinery, and the unrelated descriptor expansion from the previous implementation. Rebased onto current main, preserving its newer preference-hydration coverage.
CI fixes also seed the restored Goal tab in the split-sidebar E2E fixture and move the QuickJS-backed code-execution tests into the existing isolated-process group. The isolation group retains its existing signal-crash retry behavior; no production runtime changes.
Validation
make static-checkpassed using pinned Bun 1.3.5.Review scope
Deferred lazy hydration on workspace navigation (PRRT_kwDOPxxmWM6gBcoj): this PR intentionally restores a client-load snapshot instead of tracking composer mounts or per-workspace dirty state.