This seems very clean and handily beats keycloak there, at least.<p>I am building an application that will be deployed into a closed network, and it has some requirements regarding auth and authz that would be time-consuming(not to mention error prone) to implement. I also foresee there being a good chance of the customer wanting to integrate it with their existing stuff, so instead of having a custom user management system as part of the application, I ended up using keycloak.<p>So far, the experience has been .. okay. The beginning was kind of rough, and just recently there were some big changes, and some of the documentation is still out of date, and even more of the documentation is sort of .. meh. However, once I really started grokking both keycloak and the related authz concepts, it's been pretty smooth sailing since. There are some rough edges, like the nodejs admin client being somewhat janky(possibly auto-generated), but otherwise I would definitely use keycloak in other projects.<p>Zitadel seems like a very attractive alternative, and the documentation is stellar compared to keycloak's(at a glance at least, kudos for quickstart guides), but I'd still be sort of worried about the age and maturity of the project. Selling my customer on keycloak is relatively easy because it's not super young and being managed and actively developed by the folks at redhat. Selling them on zitadel would probably be harder.<p>Either way, best of luck. When there's a javascript client I might take this for a spin for a side project just to see how it compares to keycloak.