Undo functionality should never depend on Git repository presence

[Jean-Heng-Huang]

What variant of Codex are you using?

Codex via VS Code extension (default model, not user-configurable)

What feature would you like to see?

Make "ask" mode the default, require explicit confirmation before applying any file changes, and clearly separate preview from execution to prevent unintended destructive edits.

Additional information

Undo should never depend on Git, especially when the tool can modify files automatically.

In addition, undo functionality appears to depend on being inside a Git repository.

When attempting to undo changes made by the agent outside of a Git repository, the system shows an error indicating that undo requires a Git repository.

This is unexpected and problematic. Undo is a fundamental editor feature and should not depend on version control. It is expected to work as a local operation regardless of repository state.

This behavior becomes especially risky in combination with agent mode, which can directly modify or overwrite files.

As a result:

• Files may be overwritten
• Undo may be unavailable
• No reliable recovery path is provided

This creates a real risk of irreversible data loss during normal development workflows.

[github-actions]

Potential duplicates detected. Please review them and close your issue if it is a duplicate.

• Deleting files without permission #19202
• Allow per-file review & manual approval of code changes (like Claude Code) #19172
• [Codex Extension] Agent editing single markdown file show no "Undo | Review" buttons #19147
• Destructive cleanup can be auto-approved during premature rewrite "finalization" under guardian auto-review #18840

Powered by Codex Action

[Jean-Heng-Huang]

I don’t think this is a duplicate.

I’ve reviewed the linked issues, and they appear to focus on incorrect or unexpected edits. None of them seem to address the combination of behaviors described here.

This issue is about something more severe:

Codex can apply changes without confirmation, while also lacking a reliable undo mechanism outside a Git repository.

This creates a dangerous failure mode:

• Changes may be applied automatically
• Undo can fail due to Git dependency
• No recovery mechanism exists

As a result, files can be modified or overwritten with no way to recover the previous state, creating a real risk of irreversible data loss.

This is not just about incorrect edits — it is about the inability to recover from them.

If there is an existing issue that specifically covers both:

• lack of undo outside Git, and
• automatic/destructive edits without confirmation

please point me to it. Otherwise, this should be tracked separately.

This also violates a fundamental expectation of editors: local changes should always be undoable, regardless of version control.

[LaurentDumont]

I would agree with the general feeling of not needind git to revert.

I don't believe it should be a default requirement for projects to be in GIT for a revert to work.