dani-garcia/vaultwarden

Prefer this fork only if you need its legacy Send/policy behavior or must stay on an old snapshot. For most adopters, current upstream Vaultwarden is the safer and lower-risk choice.

Choose this fork if your main need is Chinese localization of Vaultwarden’s admin and template experience. Choose upstream instead if you want the latest server behavior, broad compatibility, and the least divergence risk.

Choose this fork only if you need its old, specific behavior and are willing to live without upstream progress. For most adopters, current Vaultwarden upstream is the safer choice.

Choose this fork if your main goal is Chinese-language usability on top of standard Vaultwarden. Choose upstream if you care more about receiving the latest fixes and operational changes quickly.

Prefer this fork if your main need is Simplified Chinese localization for Vaultwarden templates. Prefer upstream if you care about current features, fixes, and long-term maintenance.

Choose this fork only if the AWS/serverless deployment model is the main requirement. If you want the most current Vaultwarden feature set, fastest upstream fixes, or the simplest self-hosted install, upstream is the better default.

Choose this fork if Argon2-at-rest policy and deployment customization matter more than staying close to upstream. Avoid it if you want the safest upgrade path and the newest upstream fixes with minimal fork-specific maintenance.

Choose this fork if your priority is specialized compatibility or deployment constraints that upstream does not cover well. Choose upstream if you want the safest path for current fixes, broader testing, and easier long-term maintenance.

Prefer this fork only if Windows compilation is the primary requirement. If you want the latest Vaultwarden behavior and do not need Windows-specific packaging, upstream is the better default because this fork is narrowly scoped and already behind.