Start a new topic

OneDrive support

Well, that is it, really: support for OneDrive as a storage backend would be awesome.

1 person likes this idea

This is something I want to look at.

OneDrive for Business connects to the Files app. Although I don't have a clue how this interface works, it looks like a very generic interface. Wouldn't it be feasible to use the Files app indirectly to connect to available cloud services?


Office 365/student subscriptions come with 1 tb of storage, and onedrive works across linux/mac/windows. Box currently doesn't have a good bidirectional sync client otherwise I would use that. Thanks for your work!

beorg would provide an API which could then be  used in conjunction with JavaScript libraries provided for OneDrive, Dropbox, etc access so sync code could be decoupled from the beorg binary. Then for sync methods which have relatively few users - or where I am not going to get around to adding - then members of the community could write JavaScript which could be plugged into beorg. However all just theory at the moment, I haven't had time to look into this yet.

That is kinda interesting and the deeply wanna-have-it folks could work on the implement. How would you see that working?  (he said... thinking... "hey, I know javascript... "... =p ).

Support for plugins containing compiled executable code just isn't allowed by Apple at the moment - and I can't imagine it will be at any point in the near future unfortunately.

Having said that however I wonder whether it would be possible for beorg to offer a way to use JavaScript for providing access to sync. For each sync service the following needs to be implemented:

+ Authorisation

+ Checking whether authorised

+ Getting a list of Org files (with last modified dates, and optionally version if supported by sync service)

+ Downloading a file which has changed remotely

+ Uploading a file changed in beorg

+ Deleting a file

1 person likes this

I'd be curious for Matthew whether there is a more generalized interface available to most of the cloud providers he could use as a drop in for the code base (much like the fog library in ruby land or similar in other langs. I'm not a Swift or ObjC guy so can't say. Tho will check around in React Native.).

I agree with him though, without a generalized interface it is probably something he'd need people to agree to pay for and pony up to see (ahead of him building it. Almost like a kickstarter.  =] ). It's not fair otherwise and a bit like guessing as to uptake. =]


The thing is, that my company does not allow any cloud solution different than OneDrive for Business or Adobe Creative Cloud. Even iCloud is not permitted.

Privately I'm using iCloud and this works very well for me.

TLDR: Think Sync, not Storage.   =]

I think the main use case for most people adopting BeOrg is file syncing, particularly offline, not so much for simply storage as my hypothesis would be that most users are interested in a mobile clients for emacs org-mode than this as a stand alone iOS app. (so syncing, particularly offline availability would trump simple cloud storage).

I'd actually suggest taking a survey of users (if that's possible or even upvoting) to make sure you're developing the features which are goingto help you drive the community (and paid customers... you gotta eat). Flex those product management muscles. In particular if you can figure out between paid/tipping vs unpaid users that is interesting as well.

I know *personally*, I'd be keen to get support (in face, just filed a request) but that's because I want to move *off* Dropbox to it for both performance reasons (Dropbox agent seems to be going constantly berserk on OSX these days) and for enhanced security since they encrypt at rest (and also have a vault feature for my backups which right now I use a selective sync to avoid,.). YMMV.  =]

I also figure you're going to see a much higher proportion of "roll your own" people paying than not. For example, a lot of emacs users will be comfy using OwnCloud etc rather than paid commerical services like Box or Goog or OneDrive though they may have access them. I have a large goog drive, I pay for dropbox for example because I need stuff offline syncing and wish to symlink folders so I have a common experience across linux and osx desktops.  =]



I would think OneDrive is more popular than Box but It's absolutely understandable that you need to put your effort where the best return is. I'll check if OneDrive is a file provider.

After adding Box sync and seeing very little uptake I've been a little more cautious about adding any other sync backends (as each requires testing for each release, SDKs need updating, etc). I want to add the ability for beorg to use any app which acts as a file provider if that turns out to be possible (may not for purposes of background refresh, etc so still some investigation to do). That way if One Drive supports being a file provider then beorg could use it. No ETA on this yet but I do hope to start looking into this soon.

1 person likes this
Any chance this will be considered?
+1 I work for the US govt and Dropbox is blocked but OneDrive isn't so I use only OneDrive.
Login or Signup to post a comment