Updated bridge to v0.12.5
https://git.due.ren/andreas/mautrix-whatsapp-cloudron/releases/tag/v1.2.3
Updated bridge to v0.12.5
https://git.due.ren/andreas/mautrix-whatsapp-cloudron/releases/tag/v1.2.3
@girish Is this package still of interest?
@timconsidine you can also add the matrix WhatsApp bridge: andreasdueren/mautrix-whatsapp-cloudron:1.2.2
@timconsidine yes: andreasdueren/openobserve-cloudron:0.1.3
Updated bridge to v0.12.4
https://git.due.ren/andreas/mautrix-whatsapp-cloudron/releases/tag/v1.2.2
Ok so I was trying to read up a bit on federation because I was confused why federation was working for my domain without port forwarding but not for you and I believe they are actually both working, albeit it may make sense to have clooudron also set up port forwarding of 8448
for backup.
If you check federation for your base domain, you can see that it actually checks port 443
not 8448
. Federation can work without forwarding port 8448
if the server is configured to use delegation.
While port 8448
is the default for server-to-server federation traffic, an administrator can configure their server to direct this traffic to a different host or port, such as the standard HTTPS port 443
. This is what happens when you set the .well-known
file in the dashboard.
Here is how it works:
https://malenfant.net/.well-known/matrix/server
matrix.malenfant.net
to work on port 443
, the file would (and does in your case) contain something like this: { "m.server": "matrix.malenfant.net:443" }
matrix.malenfant.net
on port 443
, completely bypassing the need for port 8448
.I assume your base domain for user names is malenfant.net
not matrix.malenfant.net
? So @didier:malenfant.net
instead of @didier:matrix.malenfant.net
.
So maybe you thought you need to enable federation for matrix.malenfant.net:8448
which is not what would happen, since other servers would check federation for malenfant.net
not matrix.malenfant.net
Enjoy your vacation and don't get trafficked!
@DidierMalenfant Potential sources for this Issues that come to my mind:
But https://federationtester.matrix.org/#malenfant.net correctly recognizes federation. Is this with your fix?
@DidierMalenfant Do you have any app installed on the base domain?
@stefanwirtz What step are you stuck at?
It looks to me that the package requires support for the GT06
protocol on its standard port, 5023
. @nebulon could you please add it to the Cloudron Traccar app package? This appears to be essential for GT06 devices to function correctly.
Edit:
Just tested this and seems to work perfectly.
@fearanp Were you able to get GT06 working? I'm still struggling with my device.
@marcusquinn haha
Summary: OpenObserve (O2 for short) is a cloud-native observability platform built specifically for logs, metrics, traces, analytics, RUM (Real User Monitoring - Performance, Errors, Session Replay) designed to work at petabyte scale.
Notes: Looks like a nice, lightweight logging solution built in rust.
I was able to get a working package going pretty easily (subject to more testing).
OpenObserve serves as a seamless replacement for Elasticsearch for users who ingest data using APIs and perform searches. OpenObserve comes with its own user interface, eliminating the need for separate installation.
You can reduce your log storage costs by ~140x compared to Elasticsearch by using OpenObserve. Below, we present the results from pushing logs from our production Kubernetes cluster to both Elasticsearch and OpenObserve using Fluent Bit.
For a full list of features, check the documentation.
Trace details page
Golden metrics based on traces
Performance analytics
Session replay
Error tracking
Pipeline
Function
SSO (Single Sign On)
RBAC (Role Based Access Control)
https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/pull/3899#event-19062298364
Finally merged. Didnโt believe in it anymore lol
@nebulon Oh I'm super happy. Am using even sub accounts without problems.
Yes, /home
is the correct path. FYI, encrypting file names will most likely create issues and not work. I also have hard links disabled because I think that had issues too.
@girish Yes a time based window would also be good. So only update if update is > Time old. Whatever is a simple implementation.
@james yes they should be but there have been various incidents in the past where automatic updates broke installs. Not blaming anyone, thatโs just in the nature of things. So giving people the option to stay behind one release for mission critical deployments where people have had experience with any potentials issues would be nice to have I believe.