Codex Desktop: add an IDE-style Git workspace with branch tree, commit graph, and changed-file explorer

Open 💬 2 comments Opened Jul 2, 2026 by Coratch

What feature would you like to see?

Codex Desktop currently has a useful Review/diff pane, but it is still primarily a change-review surface. I would like Codex Desktop to add an IDE-style Git workspace similar to JetBrains IDEA's Git tool window.

The desired workspace would combine:

  • Local and remote branch tree, including the current branch and grouped branch names
  • Commit log with graph, branch labels, author, date/time, and message
  • Filters/search for branch, author/user, date, and path
  • Changed-file tree for the selected commit/branch range
  • Commit details panel showing metadata, containment, and affected files
  • Ability to move from Git history/branch context into the existing Codex Review pane for focused diff review, comments, staging, commit, push, and PR creation

This is different from simply improving the diff view. The goal is to make Codex Desktop useful as a Git workspace for understanding branch state and history before asking Codex to change, review, commit, or push code.

Current documented behavior

The current Codex manual describes these Git-related capabilities in Codex Desktop:

  • The Review/diff pane shows Git diffs for the local project or worktree checkout.
  • It supports inline comments, staging/reverting specific chunks or entire files, and committing/pushing/creating PRs.
  • The Review pane focuses on uncommitted changes by default, with scopes for all branch changes and last-turn changes.
  • Worktrees support isolated task execution and handoff between Local and Worktree.

Those cover code review and change handling, but they do not appear to cover a full Git Log/workspace view with branch navigation, commit graph, history filtering, and selected-commit changed-file exploration.

Why this matters

When working in a repo with multiple feature branches and recent commits, a developer often needs to answer questions before asking Codex to act:

  • What branch am I on, and how does it relate to local/remote branches?
  • Which commits are on this branch and who made them?
  • What changed in a selected commit or branch range?
  • Is this branch clean, stale, ahead/behind, or based on the expected base branch?
  • Which files changed across the current branch before I ask Codex to review or fix them?

JetBrains IDEA handles this in a single Git workspace: branch tree on the left, commit graph/log in the center, changed files and commit details on the right/bottom. Codex Desktop currently feels oriented around reviewing a selected diff rather than navigating the repository state.

Suggested design

A dedicated Git tab/workspace in Codex Desktop could provide:

  1. Branch explorer
  • Local branches
  • Remote branches
  • Current branch marker
  • Optional checkout/create branch actions, consistent with existing worktree constraints
  1. Commit graph/log
  • DAG graph
  • Commit message, author, timestamp
  • Branch/tag labels
  • Search and filters
  1. Changed files panel
  • Tree grouped by directory
  • Status icons/counts
  • Selecting a file opens the existing diff/review UI
  1. Commit/branch details panel
  • SHA, author, date, branch containment
  • Changed-file summary
  • Links/actions to ask Codex to review, explain, or compare the selected range

Related issues / non-duplicates

  • #2998 asks for IDE-integrated diff/approval. This request is broader and specifically about a Codex Desktop Git workspace/log view.
  • #30336 and #30484 are about missing or regressed Git/branch/review UI. This request assumes the existing review pane works and asks for a new repository-history workspace.

Are you interested in implementing this feature?

No.

Additional information

Component: Codex Desktop / Codex app Git UI.

Use case: users comparing Codex Desktop against JetBrains IDEA's Git tool window want branch/history navigation plus changed-file exploration before entering focused review/stage/commit workflows.

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 2 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗