Do people like this? We don&#39;t do this for codex because it exists to help you and it&#39;s important that you remain the owner and accountable for your work without AI taking credit. At the same time it does mean that you can&#39;t trace how popular codex is among repos.

unknown

I noticed something interesting:

Claude Code auto-adds itself as a co-author on every git commit. Codex doesn’t.

That’s why you see Claude everywhere on GitHub, but not Codex.

I wonder why OpenAI is not doing that. Feels like an obvious branding strategy OpenAI is skipping.

I noticed something interesting:

Claude Code auto-adds itself as a co-author on every git commit. Codex doesn’t.

That’s why you see Claude everywhere on GitHub, but not Codex.

I wonder why OpenAI is not doing that. Feels like an obvious branding strategy OpenAI is skipping.

Tibo

A brief reflection on why Codex (OpenAI's AI coding tool) doesn't add attribution markers to repositories, emphasizing that the human developer should remain the owner and accountable for their work. The trade-off is that Codex usage can't be tracked across repos, unlike some competing AI coding tools that add visible attribution.

Do people like this? We don't do this for codex because it exists to help you and it's important that you remain the owner and accountable for your work without AI taking credit. At the same time it does mean that you can't trace how popular codex is among repos.

Do people like this? We don't do this for codex because it exists to help you and it's important that you remain the owner and accountable for your work without AI taking credit. At the same time it does mean that you can't trace how popular codex is among repos.