You are also welcome to use the pull request I made against 99designs a couple years ago. It also doesn't have tests but I've been using it for years now and it's worked fine.

@jenic thanks for the suggestion! Is the extension the only difference? If not perhaps pulling in your PR might make sense here.

@jenic thanks for the suggestion! Is the extension the only difference? If not perhaps pulling in your PR might make sense here.

The extension is the primary difference, but as the export commands in @mahduv's original post allude to, the directory structure and command name are also slightly different.

The directory structure for passage uses ~/.passage/store and pass uses ~/.password-store while of course the pass command is pass and passage is passage.

If you make only a small extension tweak to support both, passage users would be required to use those environment variables to fix these differences. Clearly separating them into a pass.go and passage.go would be cleaner.

If you use passage in default setup then putting AWS_VAULT_BACKEND=passage is enough with @jenic PR. So I think it should definitely be merged, but read on ...

Thing is that passage allready works with above environment variables except when trying to find the keys because this function uses filesystem directly:

func (k *passageKeyring) itemExists(key string) bool {
	var path = filepath.Join(k.dir, k.prefix, key+".gpg")

Both passage and pass have find command which would receive (k.dir, k.prefix, key).

So best case scenario would be:

1. merge jenic PR to make things painless for people using only passage
2. change function itemExist in both pass.go and passage.go to use pass/passage find first through AWS_VAULT_PASS_CMD if set and if not just pass/passage.

Then my usecase would also be supported where I use passage for non-caching permanent keys (ACCESS_KEY) and pass for temporary keys through gpg-agent caching. But just merging jenic PR does not solve my problem unfortunately ...

@mbevc1 are you are ok with changing itemExist in pass.go to use pass command like the rest of functions in there ? If yes then I will make new PR and test it out. But if not then I will just continue using my fork which is unfortunate but works ...

Sounds like a good approach. @jenic @mahduv anyone fancies opening that PR and we cna take it from there?

@mahduv to your question, I think as long as we preserve same user functionality I don't mind.

@jenic could you first reapply your PR from 99design to ByteNess repo ?

Then I will make a PR which tweaks itemExists for both pass and passage. Or you could do both :-)

I've created the PR as #61 but I kept it to the original changes as I am slightly confused by @mahduv 's use case and request. @mahduv couldn't you use both pass and passage with your shell script pass-switch without any additional changes?

@mahduv with contribution of @jenic #61 was merged and this functionality should be available via new backend. Closing this PR as done.

Released with: https://github.com/ByteNess/aws-vault/releases/tag/v7.9.0

sorry for absence, I am in the process of starting non-profit and legal stuff is ... new to me, to say the least haha

@jenic , as regards your question, I answered it in original Issue .

tldr is:
need to remove hardcoded .gpg/.age filesystem suffixes and just use pass/passage find function. But as I said there, my fork is working for me so all in due time.

Thanks for making PR to add passage for standard, non-weird setups :-)