Evaluate options for better keychain usage

[mgcm]

Mactrix is using the macOS Keychain to store the Matrix session data, via the KeychainAccesss wrapper library.

The Keychain access prompt dialog that is shown when loading Mactrix suggests that the library is using legacy file-based keychain APIs instead of the cross-platform SecItem API.

Consider implementing support for the cross-platform SecItem API, which not only might improve the UI/UX but also is the recommended way of doing it in macOS since it became available.

[mgcm]

So I replaced KeychainAccess with Valet, which uses the data protection API on macOS, and this works pretty transparently, no keychain prompts to be seen anywhere, which is great.

The thing is, this requires a Keychain Access Group entitlement, which in turn requires setting up a provisioning profile and a signing certificate for the build.

This will impact the current app distribution model, by either requiring setting up a paid Apple Developer Program for having it properly signed and notarized, or going the self-signed certificate way and have Gatekeeper pester the user about it.

[viktorstrate]

I thought that you're only required to have that entitlement when you want to be able to share keychain items among apps. I would really prefer to avoid requiring an apple developer license to build the app.

[mgcm]

from the docs, in bold:

An access group is a logical collection of apps tagged with a particular group name string. Any app in a given group can share keychain items with all the other apps in the same group. You can add an app to any number of groups, but the app is always part of at least one group that contains only itself.