[gopiandcode]

I've also experienced some difficulties with getting pass to play nicely with gpg, but the hassle was definitely worth it. An integrated pass and gpg setup allows for a single consistent means of authenticating and comes with the idle timeouts that you mention.

When I want to push to a git repo and authenticate with my private key, I just run git push normally, and a pin-entry prompt comes up, and I just need to enter my master password. Similarly, when I want to use a stored password for logging into a website, I just click the passff extension and enter my master password into the pinentry program. It would seem like something like spicypass would just bloat my system, requiring multiple programs for authenticating in different ways.

I can understand the drive for minimalism, but I can't see any reasonable metric by which pass could be seen as bloated - it provides a small set of features that are important for a password store and nothing more.

[Jfreegman]

Often it just comes down to personal preference. A necessary feature to one person is bloat to another. Git integration for example is not something that meets my criteria for a necessary feature of a password store (think non-developers), although I can certainly understand why some people might love it.

[tialaramex]

Git integration was a major plus point for me. Undo is a basic desire everywhere, and revision control with Git gets you Undo. You get a bunch of other things from Git, but being able to Undo my inevitable mistakes is essential.