Implement a new backend, like the already existing one for Vault.Kv that uses either pass or ~gpg~ directly. The question is whether to use pass or ~gpg, they're essentially equivalent, but if we went for gpg we'd avoid a needless dep on pass, I'm not saying that we shouldn't maintain pass compatibilty, but we can go around it if we want.~
Acceptance criteria
New functional backend on top of pass/gpp, associated tests, and compatibility with pass.
UPDATE: now having looked at the source code of pass, I refuse to touch GPG with a 20 foot pole, I personally don't mind the extra dependency so I'll just start wrapping pass.
Clarification and motivation
Implement a new backend, like the already existing one for Vault.Kv that uses either
passor ~gpg~ directly. The question is whether to usepassor ~gpg, they're essentially equivalent, but if we went for gpg we'd avoid a needless dep onpass, I'm not saying that we shouldn't maintainpasscompatibilty, but we can go around it if we want.~Acceptance criteria
New functional backend on top of pass/gpp, associated tests, and compatibility with
pass.UPDATE: now having looked at the source code of pass, I refuse to touch GPG with a 20 foot pole, I personally don't mind the extra dependency so I'll just start wrapping pass.