Thanks 🙂

Hi @vladimir-d,

I think I have the same problem and the same wish as @jfftck, Cal.com limits Mirotalk URL to the mirotalk.com domain. But, like me, he must have a Mirotalk instance on his Cloudron server and can't fill in the address because Cal.com considers it invalid.

And Cal.com's developers don't seem to have decided to change the regex any time soon: https://github.com/calcom/cal.com/issues/16258

Thank you so much, Nebulon,

I really appreciate your time and effort in debugging the issue and keeping us informed. Now it looks like all I can do is wait, and I hope the upstream fix comes through soon

Also, I’m a huge fan of Cloudron—your work is absolutely awesome!

@nebulon Confirming that the latest version of cal.com has embed.js rendering and working again!

This thread can be closed. It has been fixed. Yeah. 🙂

@yurikous the workflow feature is disabled in the selfhosted app unless you have a enterprise license. I don't know about the cloud version, maybe it's free there. But that is a totally different product and not comparable.

@girish As a user in the role of an administrator, you should always provide your login data with additional security features. 🙂

image.png

To be fair: I completely forgot about the 2fa requirement for displaying the admin menu item.

@bhetto said in Is it possible to whitelabel Cal.com when self-hosting with Cloudron?:

The Cal.com official documentation instructs to white label like this: https://cal.com/docs/how-to-guides/whitelabel/self-hosted-instance

If you're on the Ultimate or Platform plan of Cal.com, we have made it very easy for you to white label your self-hosted instance.

On the documentation page, it says that the instructions only apply if you are on the Ultimate or Platform plan.
But I did not find those plans on cal.com website. Must be outdated.

Anyways, looks like this is solved one way or the other.

@jordankrueger there was a recent update to the cal.com package, can you try that?

@jdaviescoates said in trouble adding Google Calendar to Cal.com App Store:

I did have that wrong, but even after correcting it still wasn't working... on Firefox.

So what was it supposed to be???

For embedding, usually you need a custom CSP - https://docs.cloudron.io/apps/#custom-csp

Oh, I just realized... I downloaded the code via the cloudron interface to try and figure out what's going on and came across this Readme.

It wasn't explcite until I found this....

alt text

I guess it's necessary to activate liscence to make the code work.

Well, that is what they seem to use all in one place for feedback too, so may as well start a new feedback or question thread.

I asked on Discord, but no new response there.

@sparkwise ah yes, that's what made me go down this route earlier as well. Unfortunately, I never found a fix for this. I think it requires some upstream fixes.

@luckow said in How do we fix the event start time? frustrating.:

TIme-slot intervals

Mr Luck. You the man!! Thank you.

I just posted a separate topic that might be part of the issue here, too: https://forum.cloudron.io/topic/10971/allowed_hostnames-environment-variable-breaks-app-startup

@necrevistonnezr said in License warning:

@micmc
Or did I misunderstand your point?

Nope, you've got me correctly.

Though I'd still disagree but, here we'd certainly be facing a very interesting point of interpretation 🙂

If you read correctly the license the term used is "to convey" and "conveying" "copies of the software" and only that could bring a headache or two. But, the added phrase "someone running Cloudron and making the software available to others" here above whether it's direct from the quote or added by you it is still only an interpretation of the license and not specifically stated as clearly as it may sound.

Hence, that's why I believe 'Cloudronners' would not necessarily enter the same category has the 'developer-provider'. Especially as those providing services with their Cloudron don't even modify nor touch the code in any way, moreover we know that the core codes in the Cloudron system are read only and thus not modifiable.

At the very worse, IF ever a client would CLAIM anything from the non-developer service provider through a system like Cloudron, in regards to getting a copy of the FOSS running on its server, what else can the provider do than tell him; "sure is the link to the developer's repository where you can find the latest updated copy of the software!?

All that said, I sure understand the other part's interpretation, and thus I can envision that cloudronners 'could' fall in the same category as developer-providers, however as explained my own interpretation is the opposite.

As usual, anyway, there's still a lot of place to debate in that field. 😉