node-red-contrib-home-assistant-websocket VS docker

It's tricky. What I did was start from the https://github.com/zachowj/node-red-contrib-home-assistant-websocket project, and cleared that out completely.

It's actually not that hard, there are some caveats, but there are a couple of very good examples for a dev/build environment, the homeassistent websocket module's build system was pretty easy to reuse.

Home Assistant Websocket Plugin for Node Red - Use Node Red for Home Assistant automation

Might be a bug with the NR websocket contrib. You could log an issue here and see what comes of it. Or maybe it's an HA bug.

Am I better off using this container: https://hub.docker.com/_/nextcloud/

It looks like I'm not the only person who has faced this. apache-based images require buster, for instance, and some docker images that rely on Ruby face issues too (for example, I decided to try setting up Postal but it looks like it's facing the same issues).

If you look at the info on https://hub.docker.com/_/nextcloud, you'll see that you aught to be specifying at least one volume, so that you have the data you want to not disappear on restart, and can access config files.

Yes, and this is what L passed through as the env variables in the docker compose file, as the docs state: https://hub.docker.com/_/nextcloud

You can't map binaries from host to container like this. What you need is a custom Dockerfile that installs ffmpeg. https://github.com/nextcloud/docker/blob/master/.examples/dockerfiles/full/fpm/Dockerfile

A good example to start with is at https://github.com/nextcloud/docker/tree/master/.examples/docker-compose/insecure/postgres/apache

Nextcloud is free and open source. The easiest way to install it is via docker containers. nextcloud docker