Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by francois01

  1. I think Harold created this module for 2.3 and made it compatible with 2.2 It works in 2.2 but it skips checkout_confirmation.php page so you go directly after the checkout_payment.php to paypal, you can cancel and return to the payment page or you can pay and return to the success page, but unfortunately it skips the confirmation page. I think it will work in 2.3
  2. francois01

    Paypal Express skips checkout_confirmation.php

    Thanks, Tsimi, you are right after better reading, so I need to use the Paypal IPN module ..
  3. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    Yes when a product has not found than a 404, when it is inactive it is no SEO error and you must handle by yourself e.g. message "Not active anymore" ...
  4. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    But when in an -p- construction an not existing product is given, SEO is not giving a 404 .. Maybe is the product still there but not active ..
  5. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    c99.php was ever a hackers program etc. so this rule prevents c99 in an url. Strange is that this customer has only c99 in the session id's in url's but for no other customer I can find this, also not in their databases (session tables) ... Maybe someone tried to change it in a c99 in an url to find out if c99 is possible or not .. ? .. So nothing to do with this SEO module ...
  6. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} c99 [OR] gives a 403 sub 371 In the old SEO module you had : RewriteRule ^(.)-p-(.).html$ product_info.php?products_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} In this new module you have : RewriteRule ^(.)-p-(.).html$ product_info.php [NC,L,QSA] Futher on in the .htaccess file : RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} c99 [OR] Since this new module I get a 403 371 when an 99 is found in a parameter (e.g. oscid), so I removed this last rule. Why now (nobody had ever detected this error on the web, so maybe it is something else) ?
  7. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    Thank you very much for the answer. We will wait for your new module if she (my customer) is still convinced that there is a difference.
  8. francois01

    ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

    Hi All, Is it right that philips.html is better for ranking (like in VirtueMart) than philips-m-48.html ? The word Philips is faster found. My customer said so but I am not sure. If this is right I think there is no contribution for that way I think ? Thanks for the answer eventually.
  9. Hi all, Some (simple) contributions for oscommerce are sold encoded. So if you look into the source you will see code like as in an SSL certificate. First if everybody sold his software in this way, you could not develop anymore, you are depended to death from that person and could not change anything for other reasons. I personnaly find this a very bad thing, and contributions are build on open source, so why encode it ? Is it not enough you get your money for the development and give the source too with the restriction you may not publish it ... Is there a way to decode them easily so you can check the source and there is no hackers code inside it ?
  10. francois01

    Encoded contributions (for sales)

    Thanks for all the answers. No Jack it is indeed no contribution (it is but the creator made a professional one based on his own contribution probably, probably some things changed). But I find this a bad progress. All software developed is based on open source (so you use always parts from others), and indeed if it is your main income you develop not for free also not extended things for oscommmerce or installing contributions (workhours and knowledge!). And if you will take your chance based on open software to sell a module created (with knowledge form others) ok, say you may not publish it, you can sell enough to people they don't have knowlegde at all in programming, but to encode it I feel it is not right. If there was no open software, so the builder has to write everything by his own, he/she could probably not develop his module. I feel it is taking from others whan you can, and then finally protect in an obsessive way your part (so you can't check what you picked from others for free). Ok if you had written a whole webshop by your own, I can understand. But if everybody should pickup ideas from others and extend it with your own ideas and encode it, that would be the end for developers because you can't work with it, you can't change the software, it would be to complicated especialy in open software. I find this way of working very very selfish. If you build something totally on his own, it's ok for me (ok it is not the open software idea). Ok this is just my opinion and have not more to say, but I hope this will not be the future ... just stop in that case with the open software idea ...