Opened 4 weeks ago

Closed 3 weeks ago

#30346 closed defect (wontfix)

Can't create or open riseup pads in Nextcloud

Reported by: alsmith Owned by: nextcloud-admin@…
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Internal Services/Service - nextcloud Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords:
Cc: gaba Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:


(1) Can't create .pad files from within Nextcloud?. Previously, I could click on the '+' icon to create a new file and choose the option to create a riseup pad. Now, that option does not exist within the drop down.

(2) Can't open .pad files from within Nextcloud?. For example, I created a pad for grants meetings about 9 days ago. I go into NextCloud, open the parent folder, and click on the .pad file, and immediately get a dialog box prompting me to download the file (see attachment). Previously, I would click on the .pad file and be re-directed to the riseup pad. I know that the pad itself is still working because I have the public link (ala and that works.

Both of these actions were possible as recently as April 24. I know gaba is also having this issue.

FWIW I am using Tor Browser 8.5a11 on a Mac.

Child Tickets

Attachments (1)

Screen Shot 2019-04-30 at 10.43.45 AM.png (42.7 KB) - added by alsmith 4 weeks ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (4)

Changed 4 weeks ago by alsmith

comment:1 Changed 4 weeks ago by gaba

Cc: gaba added

comment:2 Changed 4 weeks ago by micah


I had added this pad plugin to nextcloud to test it before Tor started using the nextcloud instance, but had determined that it was not something we could support, and so removed the plugin. I removed it after Tor started using nextcloud. I was hoping nobody would notice that this was removed, clearly I was wrong :(

There were a couple reasons why I removed it. The main reason is that it creates pads that will be destroyed by riseup's pad cleanup process, and it does so without it being obvious. This means that the pads would be created, content added, and then in 60 days, the pad would be removed from the system, but it would still be in nextcloud as a file. This would result in people thinking they still had their pads, but the pads would be empty, and you wouldn't know it. This seemed like a very unfortunate, hidden UI gotcha that seemed dangerous.

The other main reason I removed it was that the code had not been audited, and all the other add-ons we've set the policy that they have to be 'official', or reviewed, I had not reviewed this code. It is not a very 'popular' or heavily installed plugin, which makes me worried that it will not continue to be working forever, and the longer we have it enabled, the more dependent on it people become, which will cause us a problem if it becomes abandoned upstream.

I'm not sure what to do here. The code could be audited, and we could even change the code to create permanent pads only. All of this is technically possible. However, the honest truth is I do not want to maintain a fork of this plugin for the purpose of encouraging people to create permanent pads that we need to carry forever. This ends up meaning a bunch of extra work for me to do: fork the plugin, and carry that fork forward through all upgrades, re-applying the changes each time, and following all the changes that the plugin or nextcloud makes over time in order to adjust the forked changes. That extra work would result in more permanent pads, which means more work for me to carry those pads forever. So it feels to me like the wrong thing to do to spend a lot of time making something that will cause me to have to spend more time.

I don't like this answer, and I suspect you all do not either. You probably found this plugin to be particularly useful, and would like it if it were re-enabled... and I feel bad that I disabled it after people started to use it.

There is another possible solution, which would be for tor to run its own etherpad installation, and then we set the plugin to use that instead. This isn't a great solution either, because this nextcloud instance is used by other people outside of tor, so it would have to be something done after the evaluation was done, and it was determined that this project should continue, and a tor-specific nextcloud was setup.

comment:3 Changed 3 weeks ago by ln5

Resolution: wontfix
Status: newclosed

Summary: A service which shouldn't have been there from the beginning was removed.

Way forward: If this service is valuable, we (Tor) should find a way of implementing it. A good start would be a description of the needed service in general terms written down in a new ticket.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.