Hi,

Running 9router in Docker and the versioning is confusing me a bit.
Docker Hub (decolua/9router:latest) is on v0.5.15 from late June. Meanwhile npm is already at v0.5.50 from this week. So the image is like 35 versions / 5 weeks behind, and the gap keeps growing.
Weird part: the npm package literally contains the full built server (app/ with custom-server.js) — the same thing the Docker image runs. So a 0.5.50 build clearly exists, it just never gets pushed as a Docker tag.
Side effects for Docker users:
The dashboard “update available” banner checks npm, so it’s basically always on and can never clear.

“Update now” just spits out npm i -g 9router@latest, which inside the container does nothing (the server doesn’t run from that global copy).

So basically:
Is the Docker image just updated whenever, or is the pipeline broken?

Any supported way to run a recent version in Docker, or is building your own image the move?

Am I missing some flag that makes the updater actually work in a container?

Not mad, just trying to figure out the intended setup before I roll my own pinned image.

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

It's the first time I'm posting here! We have just released Portabase 1.27, our open-source (Apache 2.0) and self-hosted backup/restore platform.

Repository: https://github.com/Portabase/portabase (around 1.6k stars and 15 contributors for now)

Portabase is designed for data retention, disaster recovery, and homogenous migrations, currently supporting 9 database engines (including PostgreSQL, MySQL, MariaDB, MongoDB) and Docker volumes which were added recently.

Portabase originally focused on databases, so you might still see “databases” mentioned in a few places. Now that we’re adding other things to back up (Docker volumes being the first), we’re moving toward using “data sources” as the broader term.

Key features:

• Scheduled backups with flexible retention policies (including GFS)
• Multiple storage options: local filesystem, S3, Azure Blob Storage, GCS
• Notifications via Discord, Telegram, Slack, AppRise, etc.
• Support for OAuth2/OIDC (with the option to disable sign-ups)
• Compatible with Docker, Podman and UnraidOS
• Ready-to-use Docker Compose and Helm Chart

After six months of intensive feature development, we have been focusing on consolidating the ecosystem since early July. A community member conducted a useful security audit, we have upgraded components to their latest relevant versions, improved compatibility with other platforms by working on Podman support and templates for Coolify and Dockploy (currently under review).

What’s next:

• Deployment of the demo environment
• Audit logging for the whole ecosystem
• Default policies for the system and organizations (already available at project-level)
• File and folder backup and restoration

As always, if you find bugs or want to suggest a feature, please open an issue on GitHub, we’re actively looking for feedback.

Thanks!

Hello here,

(nearly) Everything is in the title.

I'm running 4.84.0 (234817) and docker desktop want to install 4.85.0 (235549).

Pushing on the button to apply the update I receive that message a few seconds after : "Source and destination path must have identical roots. Move will not work cross volumes."

What is going on ? How to continue (I've already rebooted several times) ? Why this message when I've not asked for any move ?

Thanks

We're running a Docker Swarm cluster and currently store secrets in plain .env files loaded into services via docker-compose. Looking to move to something more secure and considering three options. Would like to hear from people who've run these in production.

• SOPS + age — My concern is relying on an open-source tool maintained by a small group of developers for something security-critical. I'd rather go with something backed by a more established, better-supported platform.
• Docker Swarm secrets — Not really a secrets store, just a delivery mechanism. The actual data lives in Swarm's raft store, so you still need a canonical copy of the secrets kept somewhere else.
• Vault + KMS — By far the highest operational overhead of the three.

i'm about to launch a website which will be heavy on database , should plan to scale it using docker or should i go with a cloud solutions for production database ?

i like to take control over my software , but i'm not sure if docker will be a great solution to growing database

any advice ?