Is there a limit of votes that must be reached for a proposal to be accepted?
Users are not shareholders. Bitwarden is not bound to make management decisions based on user votes. The feature request vote counts just serve as a barometer for user interest, which can influence (but not mandate) decisions about how Bitwarden allocates development resources or positions its products.
It was just a question. Thank you for your answer.
1 Like
If it is like this (influence) then I question the whole voting thing. If it has no affect on decisions about new functions of Bitwarden - why do we “have to” vote? many users want it. But the developers don’t want it. So, and now? We will never see it, no matter if 100 or 1000 or 10000 votes.
2 Likes
This side-discussion was off-topic, so I moved it into a separate thread.
2 Likes
Nobody has to vote. If you believe that it is worth your effort to do so, then you can participate in the voting system, but otherwise, feel free to abstain.
I don’t think it is accurate (or fair) to claim that Bitwarden has “ignored” the feature request topic that you are referring to, since Bitwarden employees have posted almost 30 responses in that thread (which is approximately a 1:10 ratio of official responses to community comments), most recently 3 weeks ago. In 2021–2022, Bitwarden even dedicated some development resources towards researching the feasibility of implementation of such a feature.
Thats why I have set the “have to” between " ".
Well, the last answer (as far I could see) was Additional item types (pre-defined) - #293 by gtran and, for me, and it is a clear “no, we will not add this feature” (using my own words), based on two reason (“to pick the exact right mix of item types for everyone that also doesn’t clutter the UI” quote), which, again in my opinion, do ignore the users experience and wishes/needs/ideas/opinion and answers. For me, it is also ignoring the age of this feature request (March 2018) and amount of votes (778).
Of course, I can not and I do not demand any feature. I am far away from such thoughts. I bought a licence to use the app, thats all. Bitwarden is as it is today, I use it, Bitwarden works fine so far. It is ok and thats why I use it.
Maybe “declined”/“tabled”/“overruled” or some such would have been more apt word choices than “ignored”, which implies that none of the user voices were heard.
1 Like
Yes, for me these words are ok. But the result is the same.
1 Like
Another nice example for “declined”/“tabled”/“overruled/ignored" feature requests is this:
It was started in May 2020. In my opinion this “feature request” is simple to implement, it standardises the display of a credit card number across different devices/operating systems (e.g. MacOS ok, but not iOS), it helps to read the number, part of a better user experience and so on.
Yes, in May 2025 (five years after posting the initial post here in the Feature Request section) it appears on GitHub (I must say that GitHub is to complex for me, I am not a developer and I want to focus on this forum here), but there I mainly read something like “thank you for mentioning that! I’ve included the iOS behavior in our internal board for our engineering team to review.”
It is a “feature” (well, it is not a feature, it is a bug fix), which should have been implement already many years ago. I would understand a longer developing time for a feature like “tags”, but not for dividing the number in groups of four digits (as it already exists in Bitwarden for e.g. MacOS).
This example just shows that, in my opinion, the voting system is mainly another area in this forum to collect posts by users. Thats all. Because the developers of Bitwarden decide what (not) to do, no matter what users mention here in this forum (again: this is my impression). “Feature Requests” in this area can get old, very old, and grow a lot (by other, similar posts) …
2 Likes
Actually, this one is a good counter-example. In 2020, when the feature request was made, all Bitwarden apps and extensions displayed credit card numbers without spacing (1111222233334444). Bitwarden began developing the requested feature in 2021, and released it for the Desktop app, Web Vault, and browser extensions in 2022. That’s a good example of being responsive to community feature requests!
Only the mobile apps remain without the requested feature, which is why the feature request thread was re-opened. The mobile apps have recently been completely rewritten from scratch, with the new “native” versions released in 2024, which is one contributing factor to why some features are not yet fully available in the mobile apps.
Do you really feel qualified to opine whether a specific feature request would be “simple to implement” or not? I think that such assessments should best be left to actual developers.
Hi @clausimausi, Development at Bitwarden is driven by a number of sources, of which community engagement is a contributing factor. The forums provides a space for discussion and consideration, but it does not guarantee implementation. It’s also important to remember that there are a huge number of feature requests at any given point in time, and the focus of the team is on secure development (and maintenance of existing features). Rest assured, many community feature requests have been implemented, as you can see by filtering by votes.
Interested community members are also welcome to propose code contributions they wish to write over in the Github Discussions area.
3 Likes
Here is how to see those that have been implemented:
https://community.bitwarden.com/tags/c/feature-requests/5/all/roadmap:implemented
I don’t think that the roadmap: tags have been consistently applied, so the above search will only produce a partial list. The following search will pull up some additional ones:
https://community.bitwarden.com/search?q=in%3Atitle%20%3Awhite_check_mark%3A
Again, this is not a comprehensive list, because the practice of editing the title to insert a 
prefix has not been applied consistently for implemented feature requests.
Yes, I think so. I feel qualified to do this - to see a difference in developing the feature request for the credit card numbers and e.g. stronger security features. I was a developer long time ago (long before GitHub).
I understand your points about this topic (Voting System in this forum). My view on it is partly different. And, to make it clear, my aim was not to “troll” (?), it was to start a discussion about it and to hear point of view of Bitwarden. So, thank you for your answers.
2 Likes
I’m not a developer. And I don’t have any “insights” into Bitwarden (–> not a Bitwarden employee).
But I think, as much as “development” is a planned process - it’s not a completely linear process. And the “hard truth” is, that sometimes, when things “offer themselves” (e.g. technical possible or “needed/wanted” or both), even feature requests with only a handful of votes will get implemented, whereas other feature requests, with many votes, have still technical hurdles and can’t get implemented (yet).
When I look into the Release Notes, I’m sure, that also many things, that never were a feature request here, also get developed. – And the other way round: Wouldn’t it be highly impractical, if only feature requests with many votes would be allowed for the developers to be implemented, regardless of what else may be “needed” (higher priority/importance, less time and effort) right now?
I do think, that Bitwarden watches at the feature requests - and especially at the “old and large” one’s. And honestly, which password manager developer/company wouldn’t want as many features in their software as possible?? (non-sensical features and the problem of “cluttering” left aside for a moment)
And though it’s usually not meant by the term open source, but which other password manager do you know, where you can that openly discuss and “vote” for features?? (even if they don’t get implemented for a long time in some instances - you can participate, if you want to). – Would you like it more, to not even have that option??
Just some thoughts from my side…
PS: And I hope I don’t offend anyone now, but in essence, I see “voting” here more like expressing my opinions, needs/desires and preferences for new features (and sometimes even to make suggestions, that maybe no one made before). – I think voting here is not the same as e.g. ordering food in a restaurant, and have a binding claim to the meal being served in a timely manner. Make no mistake, I would like the latter too for new BW features! But it doesn’t work like that.
1 Like
Lke @grb said, users votes can influence Bitwarden’s roadmap, but cannot mandate it. Bitwarden’s users come in all shapes and sizes, which means some feature requests (regardless of their vote count) may not be adequate for a product such as Bitwarden.
I actually like it that Bitwarden’s development process is somewhat conservative; it makes their software more predictable / grow organically, despite causing the impression that things move very slowly. To me this is acceptable, given the nature of the service provided by Bitwarden.
Of course, not all Bitwarden’s decisions will be to my liking: I actually liked the previous extension design better, and I too lament the decision to not implement custom item types (or, at least, add a few more item types that are widely used like Wi-Fi credentials, SIM card PINs, etc)… for now those haven’t been enough for me to switch providers
1 Like