codex - 💡(How to fix) Fix bug: review pane loses previous changes after adding a nested git repo [2 comments, 2 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
openai/codex#18099Fetched 2026-04-17 08:33:00
View on GitHub
Comments
2
Participants
2
Timeline
6
Reactions
0
Author
Timeline (top)
labeled ×3commented ×2subscribed ×1
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

What version of the Codex App are you using (From “About Codex” dialog)?

26.409.20454 (1462)

What subscription do you have?

pro

What platform is your computer?

macOS 26.4.1 (25E253)

What issue are you seeing?

After adding a nested Git repository inside an existing workspace repository, the Codex Review pane no longer shows the previous round of changes reliably.

In particular, the “上一轮更改” / “Previous changes” section becomes empty, even though changes were made in the prior round. The UI shows a message equivalent to “file changes will appear here or the latest diff is no longer available”.

This seems related to the review pane binding itself to the currently active Git context once a nested repo exists.

What steps can reproduce the bug?

  1. Open a Git repository in Codex / VS Code.
  2. Work for a few rounds so that the Review pane shows previous changes normally.
  3. Initialize a nested Git repository inside a subdirectory of the outer repo.
  4. Continue working in the same overall workspace.
  5. Open the Review pane and check “Previous changes”.

What is the expected behavior?

The Review pane should still be able to show the previous round of changes, or at minimum make it clear which repository context it is using.

Nested repositories should not silently make the previous diff disappear.

Additional information

  • Outer repo: monorepo
  • Inner repo: nested Git repo used for a formalization artifact
  • Source Control can detect both repos, but the Review pane appears to lose the previous diff context
  • This may be a repo-context selection issue rather than a raw Git detection issue

extent analysis

TL;DR

The issue can be mitigated by ensuring the Review pane is bound to the correct Git context, potentially by selecting the outer repository as the active Git context.

Guidance

  • Verify that the Source Control panel correctly detects both the outer and inner repositories, and check if switching between them updates the Review pane's behavior.
  • Try to manually select the outer repository as the active Git context in the Source Control panel before opening the Review pane to see if it restores the previous changes.
  • Check if there are any settings or configurations in the Codex App or VS Code that control how nested repositories are handled in the Review pane.
  • Investigate if there are any known issues or limitations with the current version of the Codex App (26.409.20454) regarding nested repositories and the Review pane.

Example

No code snippet is provided as the issue seems related to the Codex App's UI and Git context handling.

Notes

The provided information suggests that the issue might be specific to the interaction between the Codex App, VS Code, and nested Git repositories. The solution might depend on the specific configurations and versions used.

Recommendation

Apply workaround: Manually select the outer repository as the active Git context before using the Review pane, as this might help mitigate the issue until a more permanent fix is available.

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING