[arikrahman]

That's what I'm saying, a lot of people are coping with a product they admit will need a fork.

Not only is it incurring the cost of project fragmentation, but also incurring an always online cost with overly-complicated docker solutions, when a fully offline and airgapped solution already exists.

Furthermore, staying with the same ecosystem invokes the sunken cost fallacy. But the migration from Bitwarden couldn't be simpler (just export Bitwarden json file). It's almost a form of battered woman syndrome people are inflicting on themselves when quite simply they can hop onto an already proven ecosystem that doesn't bait and switch.

[omnimus]

I was on keepass before bitwarden. Bitwarden just solves more things for me. I am sure the keepass ecosystem improved a lot over the years but fundamentally i find vaultwarden docker to be far easier. Especially for my work and family members that i convinced to use bitwarden. If they were also in charge of the sync it wouldn't be possible.

Afaik vaultwarden and bitwarden clients are as proven as keepass.

[arikrahman]

Proven to bait and switch as it turns out much unlike keepass.