Control Web Panel

WebPanel => Updates => Topic started by: Xweb on August 23, 2026, 12:36:01 AM

Title: CWP 1.9 — Can we build a community-reported status for the main components?
Post by: Xweb on August 23, 2026, 12:36:01 AM

Hello everyone,

I would like to make another attempt to bring some clarity to the current status of CWP releases.

I previously raised a similar topic during the 1.8 release, asking whether we could have a clearer distinction between issues that are fixed, partially fixed, still open, under testing, or not yet verified.

I am not opening this thread to criticize the CWP team or to replace the official changelog. The official changelog is useful and remains the authoritative source for what has been changed in each release.

However, as releases continue to arrive, it is becoming increasingly difficult for administrators to understand the real-world status of individual components, especially across different operating systems.

For example, when a changelog says that something has been "fixed" or "improved", there are still some practical questions:

• Has the fix actually been verified by users?
• Is the component fully working, or only partially?
• Does the behaviour differ between AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux?
• Does it differ between EL8 and EL9?
• Was the underlying service tested, or only the CWP UI?
• Are there known regressions that are not mentioned in the changelog?
• Has restore actually been tested, rather than only backup creation?

I think the community could help build a useful picture here.


What I would like to collect

Please report only things that you have personally tested or observed.

Please do not report a component as "Working" simply because you have not encountered a problem with it.

If you have not tested something, please use Not tested.

Please include:

Code: [Select]

CWP version:
OS / distribution:
OS version:

YUM/DNF Manager:          Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Firewall:                 Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
ModSecurity:              Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
SSL / AutoSSL:            Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
DNS:                      Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Apache / Nginx:            Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
PHP / PHP-FPM:            Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
MariaDB / MySQL:          Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Postfix:                  Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Dovecot:                  Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
FTP:                      Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested

Local backup:             Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Remote/FTP backup:        Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Backup notification:      Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Backup report:            Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested
Restore:                  Working / Partial / Not working / Not tested

Existing websites after update:
Working / Partial / Problems

Database-dependent websites:
Working / Partial / Problems

Did these functions work correctly before your last CWP update?
YES / NO / UNKNOWN


For any Partial or Not working result, please briefly describe the actual symptom.

For example:

Code: [Select]

YUM Manager: Not working
Symptom: infinite loading, no content displayed.

Firewall: Not working
Symptom: page loads indefinitely.

MariaDB: Working
Existing websites: Working


Production-impacting issues

I would also particularly like to collect reports where an update resulted in an actual production impact, such as:

• websites becoming unavailable;
• MariaDB/MySQL stopping or becoming inaccessible;
• PHP/PHP-FPM problems affecting existing websites;
• mail services becoming unavailable;
• DNS problems;
• SSL/AutoSSL failures;
• existing accounts becoming inaccessible.

For these reports, it would be useful to include:

Code: [Select]

CWP version before:
CWP version after:
OS / distribution:
OS version:
Component affected:
What happened:
Was the underlying service affected, or only the CWP UI?
Was manual intervention required?


Backup and restore

I would especially like to keep backup and restore information separate.

A backup job reporting "successful" does not necessarily mean that restore has been tested successfully.

Therefore, if possible, please distinguish between:

• local backup creation;
• remote/FTP backup;
• backup notification email;
• completeness of the backup report;
• account-level success/failure reporting;
• restore;
• restore of an existing backup created by a previous CWP version.

For example, if backup creation works but restore has never been tested, please report:

Code: [Select]

Backup: Working
Restore: Not tested

rather than considering the entire backup system "Working".


Please also report successful results

This is important.

I am not looking only for problems.

If you have upgraded successfully and the components above are working correctly, please report that as well.

Positive reports are just as useful as negative reports because they can help us understand whether a problem is specific to a particular OS, CWP release, configuration, or component.

Likewise, if something works correctly on AlmaLinux 8 but not on AlmaLinux 9, or on Rocky Linux but not AlmaLinux, that information is extremely valuable.

Please do not upgrade a production server just to participate in this thread.

If you have not tested something, simply mark it as "Not tested".


What I hope we can achieve

Ideally, over time we could build a simple community status list for the different CWP versions and operating systems.

For example:

Code: [Select]

CWP 1.9 / AlmaLinux 9

YUM Manager:       ?
Firewall:          ?
ModSecurity:       ?
SSL / AutoSSL:     ?
DNS:               ?
Apache / Nginx:    ?
PHP / PHP-FPM:     ?
MariaDB / MySQL:   ?
Postfix:           ?
Dovecot:           ?
FTP:               ?

Local Backup:      ?
Remote Backup:     ?
Backup Report:     ?
Notification:      ?
Restore:           ?

The same information could then be collected for other combinations, for example:

Code: [Select]

CWP 1.9 / AlmaLinux 8
CWP 1.9 / Rocky Linux 8
CWP 1.9 / Rocky Linux 9
CWP 1.8 / AlmaLinux 8
CWP 1.8 / AlmaLinux 9
...

The purpose would simply be to understand where a component has been actually tested and what administrators are experiencing in real-world environments.


This would not be an official CWP certification and would not replace the official changelog or official testing.

It would simply be a community evidence log showing what administrators are actually seeing in real-world environments.

I think this could be useful for everyone, including the CWP team, because it would help distinguish between:

Fixed → Verified → Partially working → Still broken → Not tested

rather than having all of these situations represented only by a generic "fixed" or "improved" entry in the changelog.

Thanks to everyone willing to contribute, whether your experience has been positive or negative.

Title: Re: CWP 1.9 — Can we build a community-reported status for the main components?
Post by: alexander999 on August 23, 2026, 12:47:55 PM

It seems that all the fixes are being done with the help of AI. Nobody really knows what works and what doesn’t, and there is no complete testing of the components after changes are made.

It would be really great if the developers released the source code of this panel on GitHub. I think that within a month, the community would modify this panel and fix absolutely everything that is currently not working.