Renamed project display name is inconsistently applied across Codex UI
When creating a Codex project from an existing folder, I renamed the project to a friendly display name. The sidebar correctly shows the renamed project name, but other user-facing parts of the UI continue to use the underlying folder name / workspace slug.
This makes the rename feel incomplete and creates two competing project identities in the UI.
Example:
- Folder path:
/Users/garyl/Projects/EventManagement - Underlying folder/workspace name:
EventManagement - Project display name I set:
Event Management System
Observed behavior:
- Sidebar project list shows:
Event Management System - Other project UI surfaces still show:
EventManagement - The empty-chat prompt shows:
What should we build in EventManagement?
Expected behavior:
Once a project is renamed, user-facing UI should consistently use the project display name:
Event Management System
The folder basename/path can still be shown as secondary metadata where relevant, but it should not replace the user-chosen project name in prominent UI.
Actual behavior:
Codex appears to use both names interchangeably:
Event Management Systemas the sidebar display nameEventManagementas the workspace/project name in other UI surfaces
Why this matters:
The rename UI implies that the friendly display name is the project’s user-facing identity. Continuing to show the folder slug after rename makes it look like the rename did not fully apply.
Renaming the underlying directory is not a practical workaround because local paths may be referenced by scripts, tools, bookmarks, terminal sessions, other apps, or existing workflows.
Suggested fix:
Use the renamed project display name consistently across all user-facing project UI, including:
- Empty-chat welcome prompt
- Chat headers / project selector
- Breadcrumbs or workspace labels
- Search/sidebar grouping labels
- Any other prominent project identity surfaces
Keep the folder path or basename visible only as secondary technical metadata where it is useful.
This issue has 2 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗