it would be nice to have a community repository

[JOduMonT]

@fbartels said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

awesome-cloudron

I like the awesome-cloudron idea
but we should not forget the thumb-up and/or level of trust idea which could be based on active install and/or something else - which I don't know how to do so but as an example I like how linode do it

[JOduMonT]

@fbartels they obviously had something in mind with this function

https://cloudron.io/documentation/custom-apps/tutorial/

[mehdi]

@JOduMonT Nop, the private registry thing is more when you build app yourself and do not want to push them to the public docker hub. Like a private proprietary custom app or something.

[mehdi]

I think the point of this proposal could be attained more easily if the team was more aggressive about pushing "unstable" apps to the store.

I guess right now they are a bit careful about which ones they do publish, to avoid unnecessary support requests... I am not sure how to solve this issue

[JOduMonT]

@mehdi said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

I guess right now they are a bit careful about which ones they do publish, to avoid unnecessary support requests... I am not sure how to solve this issue

I totally understand your point but the line between supporting a product and the hope user put when they pay for something is very thin.

As I also saw in the Nethserver community
is a clear and drastic line define between supported/official versus unsupported/community but also you pay for the support not to use the product which is not the case with Cloudron.

Maybe it's time, again for Cloudron to remix their license agreement but this time I don't really know how to formulate it.

[scooke]

You already have the option to install apps from others in a general sense because of Docker.

I pay for Cloudron not just because it is Docker-based, but because of how easy the devs and admins and owners have made it to use. I think adding unsupported apps to the mix even more will distract from the appeal of Cloudron. The extra apps that are available are there because the app is in the pipeline to being added to the official Cloudron store; they have been/are being worked on by people who like the Cloudron approach and want to add to that, and not to a Docker-experience in general.

The price jump from no-support to support with nethserver is a huge jump from 48€ to 250€! I think Cloudron has a good pricing structure because they have limited what they have to support. To address one of your first points, I left Yunohost exactly because of how many low level quality apps that they have, and all the hassles and problems that approach introduced. I wouldn't want to see Cloudron go that route. I like the line being thick! I am already receiving all that I hope for from Cloudron.

All that being said, I think we already have a pretty good 'community repository' of helpful users and super helpful admins. For anything that I want to do that is beyond what Cloudron offers, I just tinker away on my other VPS.

[JOduMonT]

@scooke said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

You already have the option to install apps from others in a general sense because of Docker.

are you telling me than you push apps on your Cloudron from hub.docker.com simply by adding a CloudronManifest.json ?

---

I guest my point was to giving more visibility to the non official apps compiled by the community. Maybe simply a forum section where we could post our apps with the latest version (update) then the quality could be evaluate by the number of thumb up and/or the number of support request via comment

[scooke]

@JOduMonT I get where you are coming from... but I'm more interested in what Cloudron already officially offers, which is actually pretty incredible, than what others are tinkering with. And anyway, I'm pretty sure the other apps are simply on their way to becoming official anyway, so I'd still prefer to wait for that than to try them out and have to switch later and see Forums filled with problems users are having with these unofficial builds, distracting from the help for already-official apps. I guess my point is, there are 101 things that could be added to Cloudron if you ask 101 people, but what is already offered is incredible and that is its appeal and strength.

[scooke]

@scooke Actually, what I meant by that first line was that, because of Docker in general, you can boot up another server and try out all the Docker-based apps you want already! I did that. It wasn't always successful. Cloudron appeared, I signed up early, and everything worked, always. It was wonderful. It still is. And my hope is for it to remain wonderful. Adding too much, too soon, too unsupported, will make it a mess like other attempts.

[JOduMonT]

@scooke said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

I'm pretty sure the other apps are simply on their way to becoming official anyway, so I'd still prefer to wait for that than to try them

we are both agree on that, this is why I'm here too

Cloudron have a strong base and an insurance of quality and perennity (or more so than other project) which is due of their economic model.

For the Nethserver allusion, it was only to show a project where community and pro support is cohabiting with a clear line.

@scooke said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

I get where you are coming from...

I'm from the French part of Canada but I'm pretty sure you knew that already (I'm joking)

[murgero]

@mehdi Honestly - Just adding the ability to add a secondary source (not replace the store) like debian apt can do, not sure how it is setup on the backend but something like:

## Cloudron Main Repo, DO NOT REMOVE
https://apps.cloudron.io

## Custom repos:
https://apps.example.com
https://apps.domain.tld

etc etc

[JOduMonT]

@murgero said in it would be nice to have a community repository:

@mehdi Honestly - Just adding the ability to add a secondary source (not replace the store) like debian apt can do, not sure how it is setup on the backend but something like:

this is the Yunohost approach, but they also qualify on quality the apps.

[scooke]

@JOduMonT Sincerely not trying to be snarky, but if Yunohost already does this, why not stick with Yunohost? As well as using Docker just as it is on your own server. I just don't see how adding this is not going to affect the overall Cloudron experience. When people write in asking for help and don't receive it the way they hope, then the complaints will start, tarnishing the Cloudron rep. I mean even this request itself suggests Cloudron is lacking somehow... but as I've shared, it has been the best approach to harnessing the promise of Docker that I've come across and I really want to see it continue well.

[JOduMonT]

@scooke All Izz Well my friend

I just said Yunohost have a second repository, not than Yunohost was better than or worst.