CENTOS WEBPANEL IMPROVEMENTS (CWP)

yokowasis

@warih said:

@yokowasis said:

@coreflux said:

@yokowasis said:
. . . . This caused me to lose millions and force me to install vestacp.

Let's hope you won't lose more millions because of that.

Nah. It's all good. My vestacp still working solid.

do you use a file manager in vestacp?

no

nitramoneito

@SecNinja care now to comment on the status of security on CWP

AlwaysSkint

@nitramoneito
Whilst you're here, might you look into being able to setup DKM/SPF for the hostname, plus being able to add more than two nameservers.
Slave DNS would be a bonus.

nitramoneito

@AlwaysSkint CWP has been supporting slave DNS since the beginning of the month. That one is already available.

AlwaysSkint

@nitramoneito said:
@AlwaysSkint CWP has been supporting slave DNS since the beginning of the month. That one is already available.

Just need full DNS for the hostname, then.

nitramoneito

hahahah, funny.

WebHostingUK

@nitramoneito Whats the difference between your free and pro version and what tools are available for easy migration from cPanel ?

AlwaysSkint

I'm wondering how well CWP done during the latest Rack911 review, if done yet.
Plus, still looking for SPF/DKIM/DNS settings for the hostname. ( @nitramoneito )
I do notice a lot of committed RAM usage compared to other panels (cPanel in particular) and haven't yet found a means to reduce that.

@WebHostingUK http://centos-webpanel.com/tag/cwppro
The Pro version adds a few additional features, that many folks won't need. A 'yum -y update' is much quicker than the GUI version, for example.
I run both free and Pro versions, with the Pro used for a 'live' client.
At an individual cPanel account level, I found it very easy to move a client from cPanel.

FranciscoPaixao

I have never seen a panel so full of problems like this. VestaCP is much superior. Make no mistake about the name of this panel, it is not Open Source.