Wordpress Toolkit automatic update vs Softaculous automatic update

[PeteS]

Wordpress Toolkit automatic update defaults to minor/no/no (core/plugins/themes), and when it first is accessed in WHM it scans for all installations and attaches them. It also modifies wp-config.php WITHOUT a way (yet) to detach them en-mass (shame on you!). Typically (often) Softaculous is also installed and was likely the installer for the WP install, and has its own set of automatic update settings.

1- If a WP installation is detached (one-at-a-time Grrrr!) the next time a scan is run it is re-attached! How can this be prevented? I assume a new installation must be scanned for in order to show up in WPTK, unless it is installed from within WPTK, correct? (It appears that removing WP from Softaculous would be expected to prevent this, but seems unlikely to assume hosts would do that.)

2- If BOTH WPTK and Softaculous are installed, and their automatic update settings conflict, what is the result? Would it be the highest privileges that prevail? Am I correct in assuming they are two different systems entirely that will BOTH redundantly run?

3- If a host wants to remove WP from Softaculous (to prevent confusion and redundancy), how is that done completely? I assume simply removing it as a package option in Softaculous would not remove things that it set up (like updating and backups), correct?

4- Related to #3, I see no way to automate backups in WPTK. Am I missing something? Without that, good luck with getting people to remove WP from Softaculous!

-Pete

 

[cPRex]

Hey there, @PeteS - the designers of Wordpress Toolkit have decided that any batch functions are reserved for the Deluxe version at this time, as that is the version aimed at the larger hosting clients managing many domains.

1 - You can place a touchfile named .wp-toolkit-ignore in the document root for Wordpress. For example, if they have Wordpress installed in the root of their site, you would create /home/username/public_html/.wp-toolkit-ignore

2 - The best answer to this is whichever service happens to perform the update first. They won't cause any conflicts, just whichever tool happens to perform it first.

3 - I can't speak for Softaculous software so I can't answer this one :D

4 - Correct - there is currently not a way to setup automated backups through the tool. However, a full cPanel account backup would take care of everything related to the Wordpress site.

Let me know if you have more questions!

 

[PeteS]

Hey there, @PeteS - the designers of Wordpress Toolkit have decided that any batch functions are reserved for the Deluxe version at this time, as that is the version aimed at the larger hosting clients managing many domains.

Oh, I'm sure they have, but... when you create a problem for us, without warning, and then tell us we have to pay for a solution (and not even have the cost, or available date on top of that!) just how is that right? This needs to be reconsidered.

1 - You can place a touchfile named .wp-toolkit-ignore in the document root for Wordpress. For example, if they have Wordpress installed in the root of their site, you would create /home/username/public_html/.wp-toolkit-ignore

Where is the FULL documentation of this and anything else similar?! What I could find was quite terse, and not generously annotated as cPanel typically does. But really, this should be an option feature when disconnecting. It should also have been considered in the adding... give us the option to auto add all on first run, or review and uncheck individual installs (and lock them out). The same should be an option when scanning manually.

2 - The best answer to this is whichever service happens to perform the update first. They won't cause any conflicts, just whichever tool happens to perform it first.

That doesn't make any sense. I appreciate that they don't conflict, but they do duplicate, and how can you say "whichever happens to perform the update first" unless you assume they are set for the same update level? Wouldn't it be a case of the highest privileges prevailing?

3 - I can't speak for Softaculous software so I can't answer this one :D

Fair enough, UNLESS you create a problem for us by your rush to roll this out, without proper docs made available showing the "gotchas." You know full well that a large number of hosts will have Softaculaous in play, and you are clearly looking to displace it, since they don't really play efficiently together. Clearly your intent (unless you didn't give a care at all) was that WP would be removed from Softaculous and migrated to management in WPTK, am I wrong? So proper docs and warnings, and work-arounds would be in order. (I appreciate how this is not normally the case the cPanel docs, but not this time!)

4 - Correct - there is currently not a way to setup automated backups through the tool. However, a full cPanel account backup would take care of everything related to the Wordpress site.

That is not going to fly, oh wait, automated BU will be in the paid version, I bet, right? A full account backup is not a reasonable workaround considering the backup size and ease of management for users, compared to the backup config in Softaculous.

I'm sorry this sounds so snarky, but this is not a small deal (see: Completely Uninstall Wordpress Toolkit including users) and it is irritating to have something done to us in this way. Ever hear the saying "Never time to do it right, but always time to do it over?" I am particularly sensitive to this right now because of the mess you proposed for the DNS zone editor in v92, which you then wisely backed off on until you make it actually an upgrade instead of a downgrade (see: Adding and editing multiple records in DNS Zone Manager). The same logic should have applied here.

-Pete

 

[cPRex]

Thanks for the additional thoughts. We had an update in the other thread from one of the Wordpress Toolkit developers just this morning, so reading through that may be helpful as well.

There is currently not a plan to have automated backups available in the paid version. I can't say if that will be available in the future or not, but I'm not aware of plans for this at this point.

There's nothing wrong with sticking with Softaculous if you like that tool, but since it's not something we make we aren't considering any conflicts that may arise. To be extra safe, if this were my machine, I'd recommend only one tool was handling updates.