BitWarden already has lots of clients.
Are there? I’d be very much interested to know. I’ve been looking for other clients before, because I didn’t like the sluggishness of the Electron client, but couldn’t find any usable clients at all. There are some projects on Github, none of which seemed to be in a usable state. Perhaps I have been missing something.
This is being blown a bit out of proportion though. All they are saying is the official SDK may have some non-free components going forward. So what? It’s a private company, they can do what they want. Or the community can just fork it and move forward with a free one if they want, but it’s just not going to be in the official BitWarden clients. Hardly news or a big deal.
Nobody said that they can’t do that (although people rightfully questioned that their changes are indeed comatible with the GPLv3). I very much disagree that this isn’t a big deal, though.
thayerw@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
I can only speak for myself, but I would never trust opaque, proprietary software to manage my credentials, especially in a networked environment. For me, that’s a total showstopper.
I’ve never had need to use Bitwarden or Vaultwarden as I’ve always been happy with KeePass, but this news would definitely have me choosing an alternative.
30p87@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
I always found it weird for people to recommend BitWarden … it just FELT like a company that’ll go completely off track sooner or later. And it did. Oh wonder. KeePass ftw!
Lemmchen@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Let’s see how things evolve before declaring things like that.
Darorad@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Eh, there’s a completely independent reimplementation of the server, so I’d be surprised if the same doesn’t happen for the apps if there’s a real issue that comes up