xyzulu I completely understand and respect your technical perspective.
- Yes, ZIP extraction logic has historically been messy across platforms (merge vs. overwrite ambiguities).
- Yes, CLI offers granular control (unzip -o, --delete flags, etc.).
- Yes, your rsync workflow is smart—for you. But the average user won’t—and shouldn’t need to—know these workarounds.
Experienced admins have solutions like rsync or staging folders. In an ideal world where all users were expert sysadmins, your argument would be perfectly valid. But I believe we’re analyzing this issue through different lenses.
Let me explain why this behavior isn’t just a "technical imperfection" (and why I used the term "critical" not for "drama" or "emotionality") but a key issue for Enhance’s commercial adoption:
Why Is This Issue More Serious Than It Seems?
We’re talking about a product explicitly marketed as:
"Enhance for web hosts - The modern all-in-one alternative to cPanel and Plesk"
"Enhance includes all the website management tools novice and advanced users need including applications, file and database management, ...(sic)... and more."
"Designed with beginners in mind, the interface is intuitive, allowing customers to quickly and easily carry out common website tasks without the steep learning curve of legacy control panels."
"Commercially minded"
Features > Website management > File manager: "Our inline file manager is fully-featured and the interface easily..."
This ☝️ isn’t a minor detail—it’s the product’s core promise.
The Disconnect Between Marketing and Functional Reality
When you advertise a "fully-featured file manager" and "intuitive interface for beginners," you establish a contract with the user.
The current file manager behavior with ZIPs silently breaks this contract.
It’s not just a failure—it’s deceptive to display "1 file decompressed" when the reality is more complex.
This creates justified distrust. It’s not a "technical flaw"—it’s a breach of the implicit contract the panel itself establishes.
The Expectation of Users Migrating from Other Control Panels (and Why It Matters)
Basic features like ZIP extraction were solved years ago by other panels. Many clients—especially those migrating from cPanel/Plesk—will assume (and take for granted) that core functionality like ZIP extraction works the same way. (This thread’s existence is proof.)
Why do they assume predictable ZIP extraction in a UI?
cPanel solved this years ago with predictable behavior:
- Overwrites everything by default.
- Documents the process clearly.
In Enhance, the message "File decompressed" suggests a complete action.
Documentation and warnings don’t clarify these limitations.
When Enhance silently skips overwrites:
- Misleading: The UI claims an action that isn’t fully executed.
- Violates the principle of least surprise: cPanel set a standard users expect.
- Generates hidden costs: Support tickets for broken sites land on our teams.
If we’re going to criticize cPanel for being obsolete, we must surpass it in the basics—not just advanced features.
The Reality of End Users
- I have unmigrated cPanel clients who literally use the file manager as an IDE 😤🙄 (yes, I know it’s bad practice—but it’s reality).
- The average user doesn’t know or care about rsync or staging folders.
- When a user loses hours of work because the panel didn’t warn them their edited files wouldn’t be overwritten: surprise and frustration!.
- When a site breaks because they assumed "File decompressed" meant a full refresh: surprise and frustration!.
The Hidden Cost of These "Minor Flaws"
Technical support falls on us, the hosting providers. How many hours/week will my team, your team, or anyone here who’s migrated to Enhance spend on tickets like: "Why weren’t my file changes applied if the panel said ‘success’?"
Clients will assume it’s our hosting error, not the panel’s.
The Myth of "It’s Always Been This Way"
- That other panels also struggle with ZIPs isn’t an excuse—it’s an opportunity.
- Precisely because Enhance is the "modern alternative," it should solve these known issues.
- As I stated earlier: cPanel—flaws and all—has handled ZIP extraction predictably for years.
The False CLI vs. GUI Dichotomy
- If you include a GUI feature, it should do what it says and do it well.
- If it can’t do it well, warn clearly.
- A functional file manager isn’t a "geek extra"—it’s a critical tool for non-technical users.
- If you include any GUI feature, it must behave intuitively or at least transparently.
- Again: End users shouldn’t need to understand rsync to extract a ZIP predictably.
If Enhance markets itself as a modern cPanel/Plesk alternative with:
- "Intuitive interface for beginners"
- "Fully-featured file manager"
- "Designed with users in mind"
...but then shifts the argument to:
- "This has always been problematic"
- "Advanced users use CLI"
- "It’s an edge case"
We can’t sell GUI simplicity and relegate basic functions to CLI territory. Let’s advocate for improvement without falling into false CLI vs. GUI dilemmas.
This is getting lengthy, so let’s wrap up:
Pragmatic Solutions (Not Perfectionism)
I propose a phased approach:
Short-term (1 week):
- Add this warning when extracting ZIPs:
⚠️ "Extraction will not overwrite existing files. For full control: Use CLI (unzip -o) or Extract to an empty folder first."
Medium-term (1-2 months):
Implement selectable modes:
- Overwrite (cPanel-style): Replaces everything (standar)
- Merge (current): Keeps edited files (optional) (I’ll be ambitious here)
- Patch: Adds only new files (optional) (I’ll be ambitious here)
- Post-extraction change log (standar)
Long-term (roadmap) (I’ll be ambitious here):
- File versioning system
- Sync with external repositories
This isn’t about "drama"—it’s a gap in user experience that will cost real money.
This isn’t about "doing everything in the GUI" or making Enhance a "Swiss Army knife"—it’s about not deceiving users with half-truths. Accessibility isn’t a favor—it’s a critical technical feature for a commercial product.
If Enhance aims to be "commercial" and "beginner-friendly," basic features like ZIP extraction must behave predictably or fail transparently.
Silent failures erode trust more than declared limitations.
To stand out as a "modern alternative," Enhance must:
- Meet basic established standards (e.g., predictable ZIPs like cPanel)
- Be transparent when it can’t (clear warnings)
- Innovate where it matters (e.g., native Git integration)
P.S. To those who dismiss GUIs: Would we criticize a car for having airbags or seatbelts because "good drivers don’t crash"? Safety (or here, usability) exists precisely for when things go wrong.
Let’s build a panel that anticipates these cases—not hides them.
