After some discussion, a forward-looking warning was adopted for KeePass 2.49 and later that displays an alert if KeePass encounters an unknown minor KDBX version. Your question was directly addressed by the developer in that discussion. There was an extended discussion about how minor upgrades should be handled shortly after the KDBX 4.1 format was introduced. I am very happy to drop the extras "for the time being" - or maybe forever (if I happen to be using a program that does not/will not make that update sooner), to keep my compatibility.Īdditionally, as that sounds a non-backwards compatible format - might I suggest that the format version is 5.0 instead of 4.1? According to semantic versioning (), it sounds like one (unless the previous version "covered" dropping unknown fields). The database contains a custom data item with a last modification time.Ĭan it also be whether "the user consents on doing it"? The database contains a custom icon with a non-empty name or a last modification time. The database contains an entry for which the password quality estimation is disabled. The database contains a group with a tag. As not all major KeePass ports have finished adding support for KDBX 4.1 yet, for now KeePass 2.48 saves databases in this new format only when at least one of the following conditions is fulfilled:
Instead of "leaving it to chance" when migration happens:
I wanted to update to 2.49 (from 2.47) to be able to copy Auto-Type sequences between entries however, I don't want to update to KDBX 4.1 file format yet (for interoperability reasons).
0 kommentar(er)
