[alexg]

Hello,

Apologies for the confusion. I said it would take me more than a month, but I didn’t say that I will definitely do it. More than a month means that I can’t do it because I don’t have that kind of time.

I believe I mentioned elsewhere on the forum that there is an issue that made me cancel the effort. In any case, the difficulty is explained here: https://www.dashed-slug.net/forums/topic/ethereum-possible/#post-3287

As explained on my last blog post, my roadmap is full right now and it will be several months before I can even think of doing any development of new components. It doesn’t make sense to go on developing new things until I fix all issues with the current products. I hope you understand.

For all of the reasons above, do not expect an ERC20 adapter any time soon.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

The latest version of the Fiat Coin Adapter now allows for multiple bank accounts. Full release notes are here: https://www.dashed-slug.net/fiat-bank-deposits-withdrawals-improved

with regards

[alexg]

Hello, I can’t give you any tips in general about this.

Look at your performance stats with the latest version and with the previous version that you feel was faster. For every measurement, load the page once, then load it again a second time to measure performance, to make sure that you are measuring cached responses.

If you know that some specific part of loading the page is taking too long then we can start looking into what is causing it and what we can do.

Another way to look at this is at the network tab, where you can see which asset was loaded at what time. If you see an asset being delayed for 3-4 seconds as you say, then that is also helpful.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

OK, you have a valid point for bringing this issue up. After looking at it again, I believe having gateway fees is not a good fit for this use case. The admin already earns commissions on customer transactions, it wouldn’t make sense to add fees on what is essentially fees. WCMp allows for gateway fees and that makes sense for things like PayPal where there are transaction fees. If you, as an admin, would like to earn more on internal transactions to the vendors, you can simply increase the commission.

For this reason, I believe the correct approach is for me to force internal transactions of this type (vendor payments) to not charge additional coin adapter fees. This is a simple change that I will do on the next patch. I believe it will be more straightforward than charging fees on commissions on payments, which I find confusing.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

You say that you performed the same test as I did and got the same results. To me this looks like an error, because one order is paid twice to the vendor. I would like to look at this issue again only after we know exactly what the correct process is, otherwise there’s no point. All I know at the moment is that when the WCMp plugin requests a payment to be made the payment gateway performs it.

It is unlikely that I will be implementing fees, so I will add some more info on the relevant thread.

Regarding notifications, please open a new thread and describe exactly what notification you would like to see. Are you referring to the actual internal transfer performed from the admin to the vendor? There are already notifications available for internal transfers, and the TX comment explains what the transfer is for. Moreover, these events are hookable, so you could perform any additional action you like, including sending more emails. Again, let’s discuss this in a new thread.

with regards

[alexg]

Thank you.

You say that my process is correct, but you see only one transaction for each commission, but I see two.

In my case, one transaction was performed when the vendor requested a withdrawal, and another one, for the same commission, when the admin marked the commission as “paid”.

I am attaching a view of my payments history from the vendor dashboard. Again, this is for the test without any dashed-slug plugins installed. I want to be sure that we are on the same page.

So, if/when you can, please tell me the following:

1. When testing using the Direct bank gateway, did you go to “Payments” -> “Withdrawal” and request a withdrawal as a vendor?

2. When testing using the Direct bank gateway, did you click on to “WCMp” -> “Commissions” -> (commission) -> “Mark as paid”, as an admin?

When I perform both of these actions, they each trigger process_payment() and create a transaction, as you can see in my screenshot. Once I understand why this happens I can then go on to test the crypto payment gateway again and see.

Thank you again for your help in diagnosing this. Have a good time at the summit!

with regards

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[alexg]

Hello,

With every release I include a CHANGELOG.html file, which lists all changes.

1.1.2

• Fix: Remove unneeded assets from distribution.
• Improve: Version number is now included in asset filenames to combat aggressive caches.
• Improve: If there are at least two currencies available that can be shifted, set the second one as destination currency by default.
• Improve: Minimum and maximum limits for the amount to shift are now displayed as validation errors, not placeholder text in the input field.
• Fix: Minimum and maximum amounts allowed are now taking into account any fees payable to the site (not only ShapeShift fees).
• Add: Entry in plugins list now has “News” link that points to the dashed-slug.net blog’s tag for this component.

The only change that could have any effect on performance between 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 is the addition of version numbers in assets. This is something that I do with all the plugins. It ensures that every asset (CSS or JS) loaded by the browser is definitely the one packaged with this p[articular version. This should only slow down your browser a bit, the first time you load the page after updating the plugin. I have to do this because other methods of circumventing the caching of assets are not reliable. Some caches will ignore the GET parameter timestamps that WordPress adds for this purpose.

If you want to measure performance changes it’s best to do it with numbers. For example, you could use chrome’s lighthouse to obtain some numbers with 1.1.1 and with 1.1.2. You can find Lighthouse in the dev console (F12) under the “Audits” tab.

Is the slowdown you experience significant? Which browser were you using?

[alexg]

Hello,

I have been investigating the issue where cryptocurrency withdrawals are not being recorded.

As a first step, I am attempting to reproduce your observation regarding bank withdrawals. Unfortunately I have not been able to find online any description on what the normal flow of actions is, so I had to guess. I would like to know how you perform your tests, and at the same time I will describe the tests that I performed:

First I completely uninstalled the dashed-slug plugins, to ensure that they do not interfere with normal operation of WCMp.

1. A user adds a vendor’s product to the shopping cart. The user checks out using the WooCommerce built in bank payment gateway. This creates one parent order and one sub-order (post_type: shop_order), both with status “On hold” (wc-on-hold) because bank payments need to be confirmed.

2. The admin (presumably after seeing the bank transfer), goes to the order and suborder and marks them with status “Processing” (wc-processing). A new commission (post_type: dc_commission) is created for the sub-order and is payable to the vendor.

3. The vendor can now go to “Vendor Dashboard” -> “Payments” -> “Withdrawal” and request a withdrawal on their commission. The admin receives an email about this request. Additionally, the code now triggers the WCMp “Direct Bank” gateway’s process_payment() method. A withdrawal (post_type: wcmp_transaction) is created for the commission, and its status is “Processing” (wcmp_processing). At this point the commission amount is added to the vendor’s withdrawable balance, as seen in the Vendor dashboard. Looking at the code, this number comes from summing all of the vendor’s transactions.

4. The admin can now go to “WCMp” -> “Commissions” and find the new commission, which is still “unpaid”. The admin can mark the commission as “Paid”. This triggers a second call to the Direct bank gateway’s process_payment() method and creates a new identical transaction for the same commission. The withdrawable balance is reduced a second time. The Vendor’s “withdrawal history” screen now shows TWO transactions for this one commission. The Vendor’s “banking overview” screen now shows one commission (credit) and one withdrawal (debit).

The above procedure is probably wrong, because there should be one transaction per commission, not two. However, the plugin allows me to perform two transactions, one initiated by the vendor and one by the admin.

After all of this, I am no longer sure as to what the correct flow of events is. I have read the documentation available on the plugin’s website and did not find a clear description of what the sequence of events should be. I could only find articles on how the plugin is installed and configured, not how it’s used day-to-day. If you know of any guide or article that describes this, please share it with me.

My question to you: Is this the test you performed? If not, what did you do? Can you describe your test? Do you know what the correct flow of actions should be, between vendor and admin? If we both don’t know, then I should contact the developers to find out, before proceeding any further.

Τhank you as always for your feedback!

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

I’m very glad you found a solution!

Is this hook specific only to this theme, or might it be useful for others as well? What does it do?

If you think that this might affect other themes as well, please share the hook so I can maybe include it in a subsequent release.

Also, keep in mind the warning mentioned in the FAQ under “I want to do changes to the plugin’s code.” Since it’s a hook, you might be better off creating a child theme and adding the hook in its functions.php file. Let me know if you need help with that.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

Thanks for your reply. From what you said I’m guessing you are not using WC Marketplace. If I understood correctly, your theme includes similar functionality (i.e. multivendor marketplace), and introduces its own type of sellers. Correct me if I’m wrong.

If this is so, then this payment gateway is probably not compatible with that theme. I do provide compatibility with WC Marketplace but even that has some pending issues at the moment which I’m working on.

To find out if your theme causes the problem, simply switch to a standard theme (TwentySeventeen, Storefront, etc) and try to place an order, and see if it works.

Remember I can only solve problems that I can reproduce on my machine, so if this is a problem that’s particular to the theme you’re using I have no way of investigating.

Let me know please. Thanks.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

Thank you for reporting this.

About the order status:

1. You mentioned the seller dashboard. Is this question about WooCommerce or WC Marketplace?
2. To be clear, does the issue occur only when you apply coupons, or is it unrelated to coupons?

About the return statement:

By definition there can’t be anything after the return statement. It’s possible that I may have missed something, but why do you say that? What do you have in mind?

About the billing cryptocurrency field:

1. This entire plugin depends on this field so no, it cannot be removed.
2. You are right in that your theme doesn’t know about this field, so it will simply not display it. (It is still possible to display it using a hook if needed)
3. Removing the field will not solve anything

Please let me know about the questions on order status and also if you think something is missing from the checkout code.

I hope to investigate this early next week if all goes well.

[alexg]

Hello,

It is now possible to define rewards in terms of a fiat currency. Please see the release notes for version 1.6.0 of the Faucet for more information: https://www.dashed-slug.net/stable-rewards-for-faucet/

with regards

[alexg]

Thanks.

Are you referring to issue #94? I will follow the issue and also investigate.

with regards

EDIT: I now realise that, again, these are two separate issues. The first one is probably related to some WCMp bug, the second one I need to investigate. Let’s use this thread to only discuss the second issue, i.e. crypto withdrawals not being recorded in WCMp. I will check and get back to you.

[alexg]

Hello,

Thank you for the detailed info.

I definitely do NOT recommend that you change the server time. This can create problems elsewhere.

I will review the information you gave me and try to think of something, as soon as I can.

In any case, do not change the server time.

with regards

[alexg]

Hello,

Users do not need to sign-in to the plugin, they sign-in using the normal WordPress login screen. Just make sure to assign the has_wallets capability to the user roles that you wish to have wallets, plus some other capabilities. The plugin helps you assign these capabilities to user roles.

You can refresh deposit addresses via the plugin. The old deposit addresses are retained but users are assigned a new default deposit address when they login. Users can also request to be assigned a new deposit address. To do other manipulation, you will need to modify the database table directly. If your DB prefix is the default, wp_, then the table is wp_wallets_ads, where the account column corresponds to the $user->ID. The columns are all documented with MySQL comments.

If there are other plugins that let you modify addresses, then I don’t know them.

If you wish, you can also consult the user manual, where there is a Glossary section and a Troubleshooting section plus more info; and let me know if you have any questions.

with regards

[Author]

Posts