Comment by neilv

KeePassXC might do what someone needs, and I really appreciate the work of its developers, but when advocating KeePassXC, I should also acknowledge that the "UX" is rough in parts:

1. It has lots of features and complexity, but doesn't always convey affordances for common use cases to the user.

2. Some of the UI design feels very incrementally developed (naturally), and the implementation a bit quirky in parts.

(For one of many examples, when I had to do something involving adding TOTP secrets, once I found where to add them, I had to be careful in which sequence I clicked things, or it would just discard the secret I already put in the right place. If I hadn't been watching carefully, I might not have noticed immediately that it did this, and not been able to restore the secret before it was lost.)

Of course, in an ideal world, one would like to do a great holistic rethinking of the UI design (while preserving the data model), but that's a ton of work.

When advocating it to a "technical" person (who is not scared of, say, a legacy IDE), I would say it might do everything they need. When advocating to an ordinary user, I would look at their use cases, and see what they are going to see, and how confusing or quirky that might be for them.