lesley

You likely need to add them into the template, we did not program anywhere to add ads in because e-commerce sites do not generally have them.

Which async issue?

Not any time soon, no.

The heading structure does have a problem, there is no initial h1, there is just not a good place to put it. But, if you look at things, what I did was follow a html5 system of heading structures. Having multiple h1 tags on a page is no longer considered bad if they are done correctly in their html5 container. The main section of the page is where the importance lies. Since google knows how to treat an aside, a nav, and a footer. It treats them as known repeatable content. If you look at this image, this is how things nest https://www.screencast.com/t/YXMwoBHHwv4 In a proper heading format it is like this: Page Name Page name + Subcategories sub category 1 sub category 2 Products product1 product 2 This is a proper outline format, with heading tags you can traverse the order as long as they are in order.

What page of the site are you running through the tester is what I was asking.

What page are you running through?

There really isn't a chance for us to not do the updater. We are going to do, it is being worked on now. Anything we suggest to do there will always be push back by some people. But none the less if we want to start rewriting the architecture, the updater is the best place to start. If we were to rewrite a major part of the software, now we would not have a way to deploy it shops. In the end what the updater is, is the first step to automatic updates. Since we are doing it now, we can start testing them with shops on the 1.0.x branch at some point. The updates will be minimal and will likely not cause issues. Then when we have rewritten chunks of the software, the updater will be stable enough to work with them. Going forward, I do like the idea of patreons voting on features for new versions though. It does make sense.

@datakick The updater is the first step to fixing this. The updater is going to be based off of Git practices for code management and for merging changes. Just because the core code base is legacy, it does not mean that the most important and time consuming parts of the new updater module need to be legacy as well. The module wrapper does need to be though. What the updater is giving way to, is for us to start fixing the tangled legacy code base. It will allow us time to work on the code base. Like @Traumflug mentioned earlier, he is working on scripts to make the build process more stable and automatic. The updater module is doing the same thing. As much as we would like for it to be the case, just downloading the repo, running composer, and zipping it back up is not the way the package builds. There are translations, database changes, submodules that get out of sync. Before we started working on the scripts it took around 4-5 hours to build a release. Now it takes 4-5 minutes. With the updater we have the issues. The same amount of time, but with a spaghetti codebase that is falling apart. So not only are we making updates, we are patching the updater to actually work too. This is why we want to make an updater. Saving time is the only way we are going to get ahead with a small team. We have to look at our processes and refine them to cut the fat out. Two months ago if we decided to release a new version with an update we would be looking at 10-15 hours of work. Now we are looking at around 8. Once we get the updater finished we will be looking at 10 minutes worth of work. That is 9:50 that can be spent somewhere else. As for time and plans. In the last month the GDPR module has had over 200 hours worth of work. Its a big fix to a tough problem. A problem we do not feel is handled correctly by most of the other modules on the market, so we are trying to handle it correctly. As far as a rough roadmap, this is what we have discussed so far, but nothing is set in stone yet. 1.0.x - just bug fixes 1.1.x - modernize the front end, convert to bootstrap 4 and have a new theme 1.2.x - modernize the backend, convert to bootstrap 4 and have a new theme Of course features will be added permitting they will not break things, but those are the main points.

The official statement is it is being worked on and it is taking longer than expected. I cannot give an ETA because we do not know it.

Do you know if this is happening with other sites? I know there was a big row a couple months ago where uBlock decided to block the stripe tracking scripts.

Is error reporting turned on for the site? If so, turn it off.

Honestly, the truth is until the law is litigated we will not know what is actually required. I know for a point of contention that a ton of people can be identified without one piece of information given, just by machine footprint. I have been following this project for a while, https://amiunique.org/fp

Just out of curiosity how big are the shops you are scaling in this manner? Like order volume and things like that.

I honestly have never done it, because the need has never arose. I don't see your use case for using a system like this, other than just sheer wanting to. I am pretty linear in my thinking and the time I spend with doing things. I generally have an end means for doing it.

Not really, but I would ask, do you have the need? Or is it just something you are playing with?

Are you looking at a product that has combinations?

Ok, its still there. It hides when there are combinations. Then you can control it under the individual combination. Sorry, I thought you were talking about this field at first, https://thirtybees.com/developer-blog/adding-product-creation-date/

Interesting. I cannot locate what took it away yet. None of the templates have been edited.

The field was never merged to the core. I am thinking you all custom added it in.

Hey @Eolia we were actually talking about you earlier this week. I saw some of your recent tweets, you seem to be putting the pressure on them.

I think you might have missed some files it sounds like. Good luck with your shop.

I think, coupled with the copyright and trademark lines makes it closed source. We looked at the code and wanted to borrow some of it, but we decided agaInst it for that reason. I did ask @mickaelandrieu about it, but he does not work on that team.

Check the tabs directory, that all seems to be missing an OSL license and seems to be closed source by the way it is done.

Be careful @datakick there are parts of that module that are not licensed under open source. I think that is why it is not on GitHub.

We are looking at the next day or two. We have looked at their solution and seen the issues with it, so we will not have them in our module.