Ken
-
Posts
316 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Ken
-
-
+1
-
no permission its my mistake sorry anyway
No? I had to do it once and that's how I did it. Either way no worries.
-
no i have 2 bugs this one on order steps and other one when make payment from admin panel thread link you mention by the way i use patch version as usual
Oh I see. So duplicate titles not duplicate issues. You should be able to edit the title by editing your post and then going into the full or advanced editor I believe.
-
And I used the patch and worked fine
.I think he's talking about when he makes a payment from admin after he upgraded as he mentioned on his duplicate thread here: http://www.blesta.com/forums/index.php?/topic/1667-bug-after-upgrade-from-306-to-307/
-
-
@Paul Interesting that I have to interpret only to you in other words, everyone else seems to understand. Yes, it's the 'read-only' request.
Personally I do not like the dynamic around the Blesta, my fault is that I needed more than a month to realize this. In many ways it lacks features, which wouldn't be a problem if this is the first year of the development. It actually looks to me like it's in the first year of development, but as I understand it's there from the 2007.
While this is tentatively coming from the frustration it is also a friendly feedback.
The lack of this feature isn't the only reason I will probably be forced to look for the alternative software. Wish you all the best.
Blesta already has features such as security, open code, universal module and more that the alternatives don't have. The small preferential features will be added without a doubt but it's not likely that the prior will be added to the alternatives anytime soon.
-
I think it's down to common sense, VBulletin and Xenforo call their folders upload. Blesta has public_html, it's just a folder name. You move the files out of the folder if your using it in folder you unzip'ed it in.
That and public_html is standard naming convention for web root. I think it makes more sense the way it is personally.
-
It does look pretty! This should be a great asset to the Blesta community.
-
CubicWebs is right, I meant on the page title.
Ahh yes he is. It'd be everything before and including the pipe character.
-
-
If you view a client area, on the title of the page it says client #1500 | page name
Yea I just noticed that and added it in my previous reply. It doesn't seem editable in structure.pdt... or is it?
<title><?php echo (($page_title = (isset($page_title) ? $page_title : $this->_($page_title_lang, true, $get_params))) ? $this->Html->_($page_title, true) . " | " : "") . $this->Html->_($system_company->name, true);?></title>
-
I've already have had few suggestions and this is probably the last thing I have to suggest after taking the Blesta.
While it's pretty normal for the admin to see the id of the clients, I do not think it's a good practice that this information is available from the client area.
I think it doesn't look professional and human. When clients are logged in the client area they should not see the id number (#1501, #1502, 1503, etc).
You're only seeing this on invoices right? That's the only place where it displays on our system which is completely normal. Whether from your cable company at home or one of your suppliers for your company it's pretty standard to see an account number included with your invoice. I disagree about it not being professional. If anything I think it is more professional having it. Especially when names can be changed. Account numbers can never be changed.
Edit: Do you mean in the page title? If so then maybe there's a way to edit that in structure.pdt?
-
Any other logs I can peak in for an idea of what is happening?
Where are your logs from the Blesta server? Tail Blesta's webserver logs while provisioning and if you don't get anything there then check firewall logs. If you still get nothing then go back to the cPanel and check any outbound connection logs from there.
-
Ken,
While I appreciate your response, I need some reason answer's, not funny guy answers.
1. Yes, it's supposed to be a plug and play system, where you put in your credentials and it works. I shouldn't have to spend an infinity number of hours 'troubleshooting' a system to try to get it to work. I didn't have to do that with WHMCS. It just worked.
2. I've allowed myself MANY hours now and keep hitting, issue after issue, after issue with this system. I mean, seriously. Enough is enough.
Sounds like you can use a little humor in your stressful day.
Yes, the module is plug & play but it's a web application. There is a stack of applications, servers, networks and other variables behind it that are contingent on your ability to configure your system and read documentation. Since we're on the subject of documentation, you failed to read it on the last thread. It was not a Blesta issue yet in this thread you insinuate that your previous problems have been.
Once you double posted with a Blesta flame you ended it with "What gives?!" and I just told you. You need to take the proper steps to ensure your system is working before putting it in production.
Lastly your statements about WHMCS are inaccurate as their users have a slew of problems daily and they have security issues on a regular basis to the point that there are repos dedicated to patching up it's flaws. You can shoot the messenger all you want but until you figure out what the problem is I would reserve blame if I were you.
-
I'm so fed up with so many issues that I'm having to work through with this billing software and error after error, problem after problem with it. I mean come on, enough is enough. Then I have to sit around and wait for responses to these issues which causes me a great deal of aggravation and lots of wasted time having to always wait on support responses to these issues. What gives?!
Let it be a couple of lessons learned:
1. It's not a plug & play provisioning system and if you find one that is then let me know (you won't find one)
2. Try to allow yourself enough time for proper testing so that you don't put yourself in an embarrassing situation (advice the White House should have taken as it were)
Lastly.. so you know, I am empathizing here.
-
I guess it is to be assumed that there is no way to avoid this. If that's the case then we'll consider dropping Paypal Standard payments without regret. We'll still need to remove partial payments for merchant gateways.
-
But regardless, the user can generally change it to whatever they want simply by modifying the form contents as is the case with PayPal.
The only editable form I see is the Blesta payment process. Once the user is redirected to Paypal they cannot change the amount. What form are they going edit exactly?
-
Already reported and fixed for 3.0.7.
Thank you, Sir.
-
Declined payments are being run twice back-to-back and then two identical emails are being sent to the clients. Intended behavior or bug?
-
Larry, do you have this enabled?
http://docs.blesta.com/display/user/Company+%3E+General#Company%3EGeneral-Encryption
If so then you'll want to read this section:
Setting an encryption passphrase will disable auto-debit
If enabled, encrypted payment account details can only be decrypted using the set passphrase. This means auto-debit, and the ability for clients to process payments using stored accounts will be disabled. Payments will have to be manually batched under [billing] > [batch].
-
When payments originate from third-party sources Blesta doesn't have control over them. That's just the nature of the process. When Blesta constructs the form data that is sent to PayPal or any other nonmerchant gateway, it's (generally) treated more as a suggestion by the gateway that the user should pay the given amount. It's entirely possible that someone could submit payment to your PayPal account that gets sent to Blesta in an amount Blesta didn't suggest or expect. It's even possible for users to submit payment without ever visiting your Blesta installation.
Now, that said, it would be possible to enforce through the interface that user pay the exact amount due on the invoice, but it would be misleading to suggest that Blesta could strictly enforce such a rule if accepting something other than credit card and ACH.
I'm actually more interested in what UI improvements we can make to ensure that user's don't mistakenly pay more than they intend to. I'm curious how this happened as Blesta fills in the amount due by default.
When you say third-party I am assuming you mean non-merchant gateways with hosted payment pages such as Paypal. That being the case how would they do this? If I pay an invoice in Blesta via Paypal Standard it takes them to a payment page which a set amount. I don't have the ability to change that amount. The only place I can change the amount is in Blesta itself for which the way I see it can just be removed. Unless you mean other non-merchant gateways that allow you to do this?
I'm actually more interested in what UI improvements we can make to ensure that user's don't mistakenly pay more than they intend to. I'm curious how this happened as Blesta fills in the amount due by default.
I think this is a good idea too, however at our company it's not an option for clients to pay whatever they feel like paying. They need to pay the amount due or contact our billing department for payment arrangements.
-
Right now its private. But, we are weighing our options.
Very nice. It sounds interesting.
-
That is so bizarre. You see that I'm not just saying it, you see the proof for yourself. That's a little strange, huh?
Very. If you're using Blesta 3.06 and the latest Stripe API then you're using the same code base as me and mine works. I replicated your video down to the expiration date (not that it would matter).
Is it possible that the plugin is somehow outdated? Short of that and a debug mode that would allow us to see the transaction, that which I am not aware of, I'm not sure. Reinstalling is only going around the problem but it could serve useful for testing purposes (on the same server). Speaking of which this sounds a generic suggestion but is there a possible configuration issue on the server such as any type of security software?
If our code is identical and our API is identical what else could it be? It might be time to start looking outside of Blesta. Especially if you do a fresh install and get the same results.
-
In other words a client would only be allowed to pay the value listed on the invoice (e.g. not pay more, not pay less)?
Obviously, the biggest caveat with this is nonmerchant payments that come in. Blesta has no control over those, so that would still allow payments to pay more or less than the amount due on an invoice and add credits willy-nilly.
Really? I didn't know this. For example if you make a PayPal standard payment it appears to let you modify the amount but on the Blesta side. Once you submit the payment it redirects to PayPal to pay the amount. Are you saying the "Edit Payment" functionality is not able to be disabled in Blesta? I don't recall that in any previous billing systems but that's not to say that it wasn't there, it could be escaping my memory.
In a worst case scenario I'd like to be able to make it slightly less available like it is on the non-merchant gateway. ie. Edit Payment link vs. Being prompted on the submit payment payment page.
Onapp Module
in Feature Requests
Posted
They have it planned. Been waiting on it myself.