Hi,There already exists a fork of Pass that uses age as a backend.[1] Thus there's no point in reinventing that in our branch.
I will add that although Age has a lot going for it, I like my setup and will keep using OpenPGP and thus GPG pass for the foreseeable future. Therefore I will follow and contribute to a GPG branch. Feel free to try out passage though.
[1] https://github.com/FiloSottile/passage On 18.01.23 10:16, [email protected] wrote:
Hello to all,the other day I was thinking about whether it might be time to replace GPG with another backend. age [1] is written in Go, seems to follow a similar philosophy as e.g. WireGuard (reasonable algorithms, no unnecessary configuration, ...) andis accepted by the community (about 12.7k stars on Github, if that means anything) and is open source and free. In the past, there have been twodiscussions on this mailing list about replacing GPG [2, 3]. At that time the discussion was stopped due to lack of alternatives. Now we have an alternative. A project that is 100% compatible with pass and has age as an optional backend is gopass [4]. However, in my opinion, the developers of gopass have overdone itand developed a software monolith that is far too complex.So: what do you think about the idea of replacing GPG with age as an encryptionbackend?P.S.: when age was designed, one of the goals of the developers was to become abackend of pass [5] :) (but I'm not sure how actual this goal is today). [1] https://github.com/FiloSottile/age[2] https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2019-August/003732.html [3] https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/password-store/2020-October/004280.html[4] https://www.gopass.pw/[5] https://docs.google.com/document/d/11yHom20CrsuX8KQJXBBw04s80Unjv8zCg_A7sPAX_9Y/view
OpenPGP_0xDFE1D4A017337E2A.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
