Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons

[micmc]

@scooke said in Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons:

Could the same idea/process be adapted for a Superadmin to "categorize" Cloudron App Store apps, making only certain ones visible to the next level Admin. Come to think of it, a Reseller account on MXRoute allows the Superadmin to do exactly this - create a Package, name it, define it's parameters, and allow the Customer the option to choose from the prepared Packages.

Sort of. That resemble the analogy with WHM - Cpanel I use to explain the idea in my OP here.

[scooke]

@Benoit Less technical jargon is fine, but I've always appreciated that Cloudron doesn't obfuscate the name of the software being used. I think it is better that any level of user know that they are using APP_NAME, rather than a rebranded or just renamed software. As an example, I came across another project that does this - https://www.colibris-outilslibres.org/. I'm not sure why they renamed Sondage from Framadate to Sondage, YesWiki to Wiki, Jitsi to Visio (although this one is less "hidden" since it is clearly a Jitsi instance on the homepage), Mattermost to TChat, Peertube to Video, Polr to Colibris.Link, and Scrumblr to Post-It. I don't know why they do this; I would think that promoting the use of open source and self-hosted software would gain even more credence by using the well-known name of well-used software. Is it to give the impression "they" created this software? Wouldn't users feel more at ease knowing that the code is the same as what everyone else who openly and clearly uses APP_NAME? Are they trying to establish a market name? For me, looking back at my own journey, I feel I'd be surprised to find out that "TChat" is not their app but is in fact Mattermost, which I've heard about, as an example.
I think in another post where I brought this up ppl pointed out that the nature of the licences allows people to rename the software. I just hope this isn't part of whatever "Package" option that Cloudron develops.

EDIT: I just checked out your company and am happy to see you've taken the Cloudron route and displayed exactly what the software is you are offering without renaming it. Cool.

[robi]

would an integration with Directus be suitable for this? @marcusquinn ?

[marcusquinn]

I loath per-user charges for anything - it is an artificially unnecessary restriction. Far better to charge for resources. I'd actively go out of my way to circumvent any per-user licensing restrictions, including promoting competitive alternatives without it.

[robi]

@marcusquinn That wasn't the question.

[Benoit]

@scooke i don't want to change the apps names. I don't want to hide logos, marks or apps websites. We want to show that open source apps are an alternative to the GAFAM apps. We want to promote open source apps. What i would like is to have the hand to edit app store apps description with more explicit words for non technical users. I don't know how it could be done on the app store and if it is possible but it would be a big + for us and our clients.
And the fact we can't translate the app store description adds some complication for our clients.

[nebulon]

@Benoit the package description is part of the app package. If you want to update some of those, we happily accept merge-requests in their git repos. You can find all of those at https://git.cloudron.io/cloudron

[micmc]

@Benoit said in Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons:

Hi,

it could be interesting to have the possibility to present the apps with our words in the app store and not in technical words. Some clients we have doesn't understand what the apps do before they have our point of view and explanations about it. we are trying to democratize the use of open source apps and for that we have to get out of technical jargon. It would be amazing et we could adapt the app store app description and hide to complicated apps for example. Sorry for my english, I hope to be understandable.

Benoit

Quite understandable for sure and I really get your point because providing more generic, or more wide publicly understandable, names for the app with meaning. Believe me I hear you because that would be of help for some of my target market.

And we're back to what I keep saying, some feature can be from fantastic for one and an horrible idea for another, because points lifted by @scooke here below are as quite good and legitimate too.

I'm part of both world, yeah the people side who are now forced somewhat to live with technology and learn to take advantage of it, and the techies world who develops, installs, integrates, manages, and maintains all this for the people.

One thing's for sure is Cloudron is built by and for the second "world" I talk about, and as such changing the name of the apps in the apps-store would be totally out of the question for me.

However, we could certainly find a way to satisfy needs of all.

What pops my mind quickly is there could be a chart presented to the client somewhere that could provide instant understanding of the app is or what it does, so the client can lookup from what he wants to do, and be presented with the available apps he can use for such specific task. For example, there's the Category list from the drop-down menu at the top of the app store, may be something that could be rethought?

[micmc]

@scooke said in Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons:

Mattermost to TChat, Peertube to Video, Polr to Colibris.Link, and Scrumblr to Post-It. I don't know why they do this; I would think that promoting the use of open source and self-hosted software would gain even more credence by using the well-known name of well-used software.

All your points are good of course. Now, whatever is their reason to do so, at first look they're clearly reflecting the concern addressed by @Benoit because it all depends on your target market may I say it again.

Outside of Internet technologies world, among the people out there, very few who know the biiib about Mattermost, Jitsi, or even Nextcloud and it's a fact. So, when we think about it "packaging" could also help to address the problem for both world. And that all depends on HOW you present the "product" to your target market.

Example:
With package One you can easily publish a website without coding, communicate directly to all visitors though an instant chat device on your site, access all statistics you need to tweak your marketing, and create unlimited email boxes with IMAP, POP3, and SMTP.

You get:

• list your
• apps
• for package one
• with REAL app name

Again, imagination is the limit.

[Benoit]

It could be a manageable app store by the super admin of the cloudron. He could hide the default app store for non technical clients and choose what apps need to be accessible with a customization on the description of these apps. it could be an interface with toggle buttons to activate or deactivate some apps. And you can choose the text you want to show for each app activated. the process to install would be the same. Be careful for me in the back, it is the same app store but it is the front what is different and more compatible with newbies and non tech users.
it is a big improvement but it does not seem impossible to do for super @girish ;). Perhaps i don't see all the difficulties it could engage.
Anyway it could be a more comprehensible interface to help the onboarding of new users.

[micmc]

@marcusquinn said in Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons:

I loath per-user charges for anything - it is an artificially unnecessary restriction. Far better to charge for resources. I'd actively go out of my way to circumvent any per-user licensing restrictions, including promoting competitive alternatives without it.

It's NOT what we are discussing here and resources or scaling as been touched also part of the idea.

[micmc]

@Benoit said in Create app "packages" for 'managed' cloudrons:

It could be a manageable app store by the super admin of the cloudron. He could hide the default app store for non technical clients and choose what apps need to be accessible with a customization on the description of these apps. it could be an interface with toggle buttons to activate or deactivate some apps. And you can choose the text you want to show for each app activated. the process to install would be the same. Be careful for me in the back, it is the same app store but it is the front what is different and more compatible with newbies and non tech users.

Certainly, this is another way of seeing and doing things to accomplish this, and it's great ideas as well. That's the reason for such forum and how genius software are created. We have here a crowd of people with amazing backgrounds of all sorts and it's the main reason we've a rich community.

it is a big improvement but it does not seem impossible to do for super @girish ;). Perhaps i don't see all the difficulties it could engage.
Anyway it could be a more comprehensible interface to help the onboarding of new users.

Ah, you're conscious all is possible with @girish right?