Forgejo + Tailscale. Forgejo is the app behind Codeberg so it’s battle tested. I switched to it from Gitea after the controversy.

Yep - I feel that, especially after the branded hard disk carry on last year.

I’m a +1 on this. A secondhand Synology set up with some RAID will delay this decision for a few years and give you time to build your expertise on the other aspects without worrying much about data security. It’s a pity that you’re nearly at the limit of 8TB - otherwise I would have suggested a two bay NAS with 2x8TB, but if you’re going to use second hand drives (I do because I’m confident of my backup systems) maybe 4x6TB is better. Bigger drives are harder to come by 2nd hand - and plenty of people will not be comfortable with secondhand spinning rust anyway - if that’s you, then a 2 bay with 2x12TB might be a good choice.

The main downside (according to me) of a Synology is no ZFS, but that didn’t bother me until I was two years in and the owner of three of them.

Proxmox on the metal, then every service as a docker container inside an LXC or VM. Proxmox does nice snapshots (to my NAS) making it a breeze to move them from machine to machine or blow away the Proxmox install and reimport them. All the docker compose files are in git, and the things I apply to every LXC/VM (my monitoring endpoint, apt cache setup etc) are all applied with ansible playbooks also in git. All the LXC’s are cloned from a golden image that has my keys, tailscale setup etc.

100% this. And Lenovos and HPs designed for the business market generally are a pleasure to work on (in the hardware sense) if you need, with good manuals and secondhand spare parts.

I run nearly all my Docker workloads with their data just in the home directory of the VM (or LXC actually since that’s how I roll) I’m running them in, but a few have data on my separate NAS via and NFS share - so through a switch etc with no problems - just slowish.

Great. There’s two volumes there - firefly_iii_upload & firefly_iii_db.

You’ll definitely want to docker compose down first (to ensure the database is not being updated), then:

docker run --rm \
  -v firefly_iii_db:/from \
  -v $(pwd):/to \
  alpine sh -c "cd /from && tar cf /to/firefly_iii_db.tar ."

and

docker run --rm \
  -v firefly_iii_upload:/from \
  -v $(pwd):/to \
  alpine sh -c "cd /from && tar cf /to/firefly_iii_upload.tar ."

Then copy those two .tar files to the new VM. Then create the new empty volumes with:

docker volume create firefly_iii_db
docker volume create firefly_iii_upload

And untar your data into the volumes:

docker run --rm \
  -v firefly_iii_db:/to \
  -v $(pwd):/from \
  alpine sh -c "cd /to && tar xf /from/firefly_iii_db.tar"

docker run --rm \
  -v firefly_iii_upload:/to \
  -v $(pwd):/from \
  alpine sh -c "cd /to && tar xf /from/firefly_iii_upload.tar"

Then make sure you’ve manually brought over the compose file and those two .env files, and you should be able to docker compose up and be in business again. Good choice with Proxmox in my opinion.

I’m not clear from your question, but I’m guessing you’re talking about data stored in Docker volumes? (if they are bind mounts you’re all good - you can just copy it). The compose files I found online for FireflyIII use volumes, but Hammond looked like bind mounts. If you’re not sure, post your compose files here with the secrets redacted.

To move data out of a Docker volume, a common way is to mount the volume into a temporary container to copy it out. Something like:

docker run --rm \
  -v myvolume:/from \
  -v $(pwd):/to \
  alpine sh -c "cd /from && tar cf /to/myvolume.tar ."

Then on the machine you’re moving to, create the new empty Docker volume and do the temporary copy back in:

docker volume create myvolume
docker run --rm \
  -v myvolume:/to \
  -v $(pwd):/from \
  alpine sh -c "cd /to && tar xf /from/myvolume.tar"

Or, even better, just untar it into a data directory under your compose file and bind mount it so you don’t have this problem in future. Perhaps there’s some reason why Docker volumes are good, but I’m not sure what it is.

I’m local first - stuff I’m testing, playing with, or “production” stuff like Jellyfin, Forgeo, AudioBookshelf, Kavita etc etc. Local is faster, more secure, and storage is cheap. But then some of my other stuff that needs 24/7 access from the internet - websites and web apps - they go on the VPS.

I just do one Docker container per LXC. All the convenience of compose, plus those sweet Proxmox snapshots.

Is there a reason not to use Tailscale for this?

When I switched to webdev, I dropped $20 on a system admin Linux course on Udemy. I highly recommended this approach.

Forgejo - actively developed open source. It’s what powers Codeberg. Easy to set up and manage with Docker. I moved to it from Gogs and skipped Gitea after reading about the forks.

It is only resolving for devices in the Tailnet. Kuma is checking they are all up, and this Ansible playbook is checking they have all their updates. I wouldn’t have thought that was an unusual arrangement - and it’s worked perfectly for about a year till about three weeks ago.

Yes, this.

Thanks yes - that’s exactly what I needed.

Thanks - this is exactly what I needed.

Yes - we’re “I’ll let you use my electricity for your computer thing” friends, not “I’m okay with seeing your printer on my home network” friends.

Kavita is for ebooks - it’s not perfect, has some weirdness with series sometimes because of it’s manga heritage.

For me, AudioBookShelf is the clear standout for audio books, and I ended up going with Kavita for ebooks.