Selfhosted
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam posting.
-
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
view the rest of the comments
No it does not.
Self-hosted implies self-hosted. AFAIK, the end goal is being as autonomous as possible technologically-speaking. Why exclude desktop applications ?
If it cannot be reached through the network/another machine it is not really "hosted" as there is no host-client relationship. My 2c
This is what I expect from something that is "hosted" as well. I would like to access the hosted app from any machine on my network with a single installation/setup, and potentially expose it for private access from the Internet.
It is "hosted" on your workstation. There is no need for a server-client relationship for self-hosting.
By requiring a server-client relationship, you're making self-hosting uselessly hard to deploy and enforce a very specific design when others (P2P, file sync, etc) can solve the same problems more efficiently. For example, in my specific case, with Paperwork + Nextcloud file sync, my documents are distributed on all my workstations and always available even if offline. Another example is Syncthing which IMO fits the bill for self-hosting, but doesn't fit your definition of self-hosted.
I getcha now. However I think it would be leading us a stray if we called everything we installed, "self hosted", if I said I self host a game, what would you think of? More like a game server ie through the network.
Also doesn't syncthing have a Web UI I can access through the network? Granted it's been a while but I think I remember that.
OP wants something to be shared on the network... Managed centrally, hence they came here for advice
Yes I would count this game as self-hosted (as long as you don't need a third-party service to start it). And yes I agree it is a pretty wide definition. But at the same time, I really think there are a lot of good reasons to not dismiss it:
To be honest, when it comes to self-hosting, I can't shake this feeling that a lot of people are dismissing desktop apps immediately just because they are not cool nor hype anymore.
Regarding Syncthing, if I'm not mistaken, the Web UI can be opened to the network (most likely for headless servers) but by default it is only reachable through the loopback.
Regarding OP, for me, it wasn't entirely clear at first whether they wanted network access or not. They clarified it later in comments.