[ic] Talking about cPanel -- possible to make a deal?

[Jon]

> > > To what I can see, there are 3 main problems when interchange is under
> > > cPanel:
> > >
> > > 1.    permition settings of files
> >
> > Isn't that a cPanel configuration issue ? Or rather the configuration of
> file
> > permissions  when the cart is created or some time like that. In any case
> should be easy to
> > resolve.
> >
>
> To be practical, tt should be some how made workable settings as default,
> rather than who ever's configuration.
>

    I agree. Point being that it is an easy problem to over come.

>
> > >
> > > 2.    unable to use the restart command by a cart user
> >
> > This can be done at the hosting company pretty simply I believe.
> > Possibly as a separate script.  I've seen it as an added feature to the
> > restart section of the 'Web Host Manager' tool... don't know anything
> > about that tool though.
> >
>
> I saw one as "reset" but not "retart". It removes everything, and builds a
> fresh cart.
> I would not expect every or most hosting company  with cpanel to make a
> script.

    Again it doesn't appear to be to difficult to over come and solved.
Dare I say SMOP :))  being a programmer by profession.

>
>
> > >
> > > 3.    UI not accessible to users.
> >
> > It is accessible to the owners of the shopping cart with cart permissions.
> > Not sure what you mean here.
> >
>
> Sorry, what I tried to say was the shared parts in lib. I didn't look at
> details. But, it seems that it could give a user more control if  some of
> them move to cart directory.
>
> > >
> > > Is it possible that icdevelgroup negotiates with cPanel to make a deal?
> > >
> > > There is advantage of this.
> > >
> > > 1    cPanel does make the interchange more popular
> > > 2    cPanel has good control on collecting license fee.
> > >
> > > If a deal can be reached, say $0.10 or $0.20 or so per month per
> > > installation of cPanel goes to icdevelgroup, and the two parties work
> > > together to solve the main problems to certern extend, it may be good to
> > > both sides. icdevelgroup can use the fund to do many things, say:
> working
> > > out a hard copy manuel, have some one working full time for coordinating
> the
> > > integration, etc.
> > >
> > > Just an idea to make things better. I don't know if it may or may not be
> > > practical. Or, even it's tried already.
> > >
> >
> >     Of course I would not be in a position to comment to the above section
> >
>
> That let me wonder if I were in a position to suggest it. I am  not a member
> of icdevelgroup, but simply an interchange user. I love interchange. I
> appreciate icdevelgroup's work very much, and wish they get necessary fund.
> Now, there is no support from some major (or well known) commercial companpy
> (I don't know though, I just know that RedHat stopped support). Things may
> become difficult. Just think, a deal with cpanel could be good to every one,
> generate constant fund, more or less, and make something become possible.
>

    I do also appreciate IC and I'm constantly amazed how a number of particular

people are able devote so much time and some how still make a living. Amazing !
In any case, my view, limited as it is, I would think those that stand to gain
directly from
making cPanel become a more viable solution for IC ought to stand up and put
forth the effort.  The things you've mentioned already, though I'm sure there
are more,
should be fixable.  Ok, let me say it... I think cPanel people ought to come
forth and
make a few changes that would appear to go a long way.  Many of us have already
read from key people in IC development, those amazing people, how they've tried
to get cPanel to make some changes. I'm sure there are a number of reasons why
they haven't made the changes and I probably shouldn't speculate here.  So what
can we, or I, do....

Jon