Could be useful, don't think we have already an app for this.
https://www.signserver.org/
https://hub.docker.com/r/primekey/signserver-ce

@timconsidine said in Why not make Cloudron fully open source again?:

Being fully open source is a red-herring IMHO.

I love Cloudron, I promote it and recommend it because as you say it is the most accomplished platform in that field, plus I love the community and have massive respect for the two main developers, for their skills and the great software they make but also because of their friendly attitude, their care for customer support and the way they engage with users. Plus while Cloudron is not Free Software the code source is out there for any to inspect so that's great in terms of users knowing what the software actually does and that's good enough for me.

However, the point of Free Software is not only about how things are now but also about future proofing. Things might change in the devs' lives, they might need to move on, they might need a lump of cash cause something terrible happen and sell the company, or whatever else. And if the new devs have a different ethics what do we do? Look for another software and all the time and energy spent on Cloudron is kinda wasted and then not as many people benefit from this amazing platform? And to be honest the current situation makes it hard to recommend it and promote in some context because not everyone is just interested in the best software or value for money but also care about software license but ethical and practical reasons.

I don't have a perfect solution as I understand and respect Girish and Nebulon's current position in that they don't want someone to just fork everything and release it for free.

Maybe something could be added in the license that says the code must be made publicly available, and that if the license changes to a more restrictive one (one that removes the public release of the code), then the current license reverts to a Free Software license e.g. AGLP 3.0 or its successor. This would basically guarantee Freedom 0 and 1 and would implement some kind of (twisted) copyleft. And that would be enough to make me happy

But I don't know if that is possible at all?? I'm a legal geek but not on software license...yet Anyone know?

Hi all,

Just want to share a little tip on here. It looks like if you subscribe an external calendar to your NC instance (say you add your Gcalendar), then NC only refreshes it every week, which seems a little insane to me...or at least that was not enough more me.

So here is how to change the frequency on Cloudron NC instance. Simple open the NC terminal from Cloudron dashboard and enter:

sudo -u www-data php -f /app/code/occ config:app:set dav calendarSubscriptionRefreshRate --value "P1D"

Where P1D is the frequency period of 1 day. Period / time intervals are entered in the php format. P is for periods of day(D)/week(W)/month(M)/year(Y), if instead you want to enter a period in hour(H)/minute(M)/second(S) need to enter PT, e.g. PT5M will refresh every 5 minutes.

I'm sure something similar has been asked already but I couldn't find it on the forum.

Would it be possible to add to following features of User & Groups in future version of Cloudron:

• subscribe users to a specific domain (say with another drop down option for each users: default being "all" but with the possibility to select domains individually - as it is down for selecting group membership). Those users would then only be allowed to login on apps which are installed under that/those particular domain(s). Effectively this is no different that manually creating a group for each domain and then manually setting the correct access permission when installing apps, except that it would automate that process by creating those groups in the background for each domain and setting the correct rights automatically. Also it would be helpful for implementing the "3. per domain user management" aspect of the "domain admin" feature below

• create a "domain admin" role to give some members admin rights but only on certain domains so that they can (and only can): 1. access all apps and email settings on a given domain(s); 2. an managed all of apps on that/those domain(s) 3. can see all users subscribed to that/those domain(s) and can invite new users to that/those domain(s). So as role we'd have: Owner, Admin (would automatically be administrates all domains), Domain Admin (which when selected would open the drop down menu to select domains without the "All" option), Users (which when selected would open the drop down menu to select domains, with default choice on the "All" option).

It feels these two features would greatly enhance cloudron management for cases where you don't necessarily want to have admins able to administrate all domains (either for security reasons and for reducing admin time) but still want someone able to configure email accounts / lists, manage apps and invite people.

Here is just some concepts and some ideas on how it could work on the UI side. Hope this proves useful.

Hello,

Is it possible to integrate mailman to cloudron to be able to manage email lists?

It would be a great feature to have.

@jdaviescoates Yes I still use mainly Collabora with Nextcloud and I have noticed tremendous improvements, especially since NC and Collabora have worked together to improve the integration.
However, I wouldn't say it is still quite like Google doc, or quite as fast as OnlyOffice. I tired OnlyOffice when I installed CryptPad and something about it feels more responsive than Collabora due to client rendering. It is basically just like editing on a desktop and Collabora is not quite there...but pretty close. Also we can feel that both Gdocs and OnlyOffice were designed as a collaborative editing tool whereas Collabora somewhat inherits the LO single user approach and tries to adapt it for collaboration and the result still does not feel quite as sleek....but here again it is getting much better than it used to be.
I can say that Collabora does not suffer from issues from the past, does not feel laggy and is perfectly fast enough to use while not feeling it's slow or weird. Also I do think it provides the most complete online office suit in terms of functionalities, and the best if you using open document formats.

@nebulon Apologies, I meant that on mouse hover an app, there is now a grey square button (with white gear) always visible, which then turns white (with blue gear) when actually hovering over it. Before it used to be that you see only the gear (without a square) when hovering over an app and you'd see the square when hovering over the gear.

Haha I've realised this is only a dark theme issue. I've just tried in another browser with a light theme and the issue is not here. So yes, probably a slight regression on the dark theme.
Cloudron 7
Cloudron 6

@girish Yes you are right that the post started with different domains but this is because I had in mind the case of an organisation that uses separate domains for different activities, with different people being in charge of those different activities. While you are right that Cloudron does a fantastic job as isolating access to apps with the Group feature, as soon as if you give Admin right to someone, then they get full access to everything irrespectively of group / user access rules (which is of course kinda of the point of an admin!).
The issue is that in the case I mentioned, it would still be useful to give some people the ability to at least managed emails, users and apps for their particular domain / area of the organisation.
While this may not be a "common" case, I reckon it is not super rare either.

That said, the thread though as kinda of evolved into looking at ways to fine tune the rights of the Admin role rights rather than a split per domain as it started original. Lots of ideas in there. Maybe another intermediate Admin role could be step in that direction to delegate some rights (like email management) to people which would be useful in large organisations (see my second post) without granting full admin rights ?

Is there a plan for more backup backends like restic / borg for 7.3?

I recall it being listed for 7.2 at some point but looks like it got dropped off the list due to the need for a speedy release.

@nebulon Hello, just updated to 7.2.2 today and on dark theme the new contrast on app hoover looks a bit off I think. Actually it feel like something in between 7.1 and 7.2 would be good, i.e: lighter than in 7.1 so it stands out more but darker than in 7.2 so it blends more with the background.
Also I think the square around the gear icon should remain with the same background as the rest of the app if not hoovered over (as it was the case in 7.1) since the gear itself stands out enough with it's white colour.

Hello,

Just wondered if anyone is working on this as it would be a great addition for music sharing on the fediverse?

@girish said in Fix for kernel bug in Ubuntu 20.04 causing various issues:

I upgraded all our servers from Ubuntu 18 to 20 and all of them just completely hosed

Interesting.... I upgraded one server from 16 > 18 > 20 and two more servers from 18 > 20 using the Cloudron guides and never had a problem. I was going to upgrade to 22 thinking it'll all be easy but a little more unsure now.

@girish Humm I see, it really doesn't sound trivial.

I'm afraid it's unclear that things would be any easier with SYMPA as I don't think there is a docker install.

I guess that means proper mailing list is not likely to land on Cloudron any time soon. Shame as for people I work with it is the last missing piece to move everything to Cloudron.

So far I haven't found a way to really replace mailing list for working group communications as it just trikes the right balance of accessibility (everyone has an email address and roughly know how to use emails), almost instant, yet semi-organised communication. Might start a discussion and ask how other people do it for organisations with non techy people.

@jdaviescoates said in Backup mount lost its permissions - unable to remount:

At that point /cloudronbackup was root:root so perhaps that was the issue

root:root is also the case for me, it is only the mount that changes the permissions to the storage box user.

@jdaviescoates said in Backup mount lost its permissions - unable to remount:

Also thinking perhaps I should most to SSHFS too instead of CIFS given that seems to have resolved a bunch of issues for you, right?

Yes sshfs has definitely be more reliable for me. I switched to it when I hit some unmounting / backup problems in the paste due to a bug in how CIFS were handle by Cloudron and never had a problem since so never went back to CIFS.

@jdaviescoates said in Backup mount lost its permissions - unable to remount:

it has /snapshop/ in it, but looks like that is empty:

Maybe wait for @staff to confirm but I'd say that you should deleted it all and try to remount your drive one more time. If that doesn't work (and it might not as you said it was empty originally) then I don't know...sorry.

@jdaviescoates said in Backup mount lost its permissions - unable to remount:

I was about to rm -r the dir I created, but I'm scared if I do that then perhaps I'll end up deleting some backups...

Does the directory contains files? It shouldn't if your drive is not mounted!

@jdaviescoates humm ok. My storage box is mounted as sshfs so not sure how it translates to CIFS but in my case:

• if no volume is mounted /mnt/cloudronbackup is empty (and should be otherwise I also get a permission error when trying to mount)
• when mounted then /mnt/cloudronbackup and all sub directories become own by the hetzner username associated to the storage box

@jdaviescoates had a similar issue before and it was because the directory /mnt/cloudronbackup/ is supposed to be empty for volume to mount in it but it looks like you have a directory in it even if not mounted, no?

@girish Is this something you have a particular interest in implementing on your end as a way to bring mailing list to Cloudron or will it need a more collaborative effort from the community? I'm asking because we seem to have someone here with good knowledge of Mailman3 right now and so could be a good time to leverage on this. Are some of the things needed for this that can only be done on your end?

@girish
All three instances are on kernel 5.4.0-132-generic
Two instances (including the one that used to hang) are on Ubuntu 20.04.3
One instance is on 20.04.4