Kryptronic Software Support Forum

You're going to have to use a custom script that combines all of the costs for that.  The issue is that every product can have it's own shipping method and it's own ship to address, which requires separate queries in the program code.

The way to handle this in CCP5 is with a custom script.  You can pick up the last shipping address entered and base your calcs on that one.  We'll probably be releasing a script on the forum within the next couple of weeks as as example for both USPS and UPS.

>The way to handle this in
>CCP5 is with a custom
>script.  You can pick
>up the last shipping address
>entered and base your calcs
>on that one.  We'll
>probably be releasing a script
>on the forum within the
>next couple of weeks as
>as example for both USPS
>and UPS.


Am I to understnad that shipping calculations will be grossly over charged for a customer who orders multiple items? 

Does that mean if I have a customer order a full array of parts they will be charged several times actual shipping?

That sounds like a serious bug.  My particular application will definitely fall in that category as a I sell thousands of parts for alarm, video, and telephone installations.  A customer will almost always order multiple parts in different subcategories to fill out their needs.  In fact, historically I have rarely had orders for just one type of part. 

It may even fall on the verge of criminal fraud if I implement a system like that knowing about the problem.  I have been doing setup and testing for a couple days now, but that is a bug I hadn't noticed.  I won't be able to implement your cart until it is fixed. 

Or, is that bug fixed in the st_cart.pl I just received?

It's not a bug.  Perhaps a design flaw.  The program was intended to work that way.  If you guys are saying it shouldn't be this way, we'll work on an updated methodology early this week.

Absolutely, I agree, it shouldn't work this way for most of us as DEFAULT,
the default method should be adding shipping to entire 'bundled' orded instead of every item,
it seems to be just necessary,
BUT there is the other side too, we have a customers who waited a COUPLE OF MONTHS
for this release of CCP, because they need exactly this:
possibility to add DIFFERENT shipping charges to EVERY item, no matter if it is ordered
as 'bundle' at their store because their items are sent to their cutomers from different
cities and often via different carriers
CCP5 works in this case excellent, but again, it shouldn't be the default

-AAJ

YES!! Wonderful--thanks.

I do agree.  It would be really bad to charge somebody who orders 5 items from my online store, and we charge the seperate charges for each item.  Even though they are shipping from and to the same location.  I'm glad somebody noticed this before I went live.  I've only tested with 1 item in the cart.     Anyhow, please let us know when a patch is available for this. 

Will

Good points, all of them.  The updated code will combine shipping for items where:

(1) The shipping address is the same.
(2) The shipper zip code is the same.
(3) The shipping calc method is the same.

Whew.  That is going to be a nasty bit of code to write.

Yes, both USPS and UPS will work the same way.  The default (product based) method will continue to work as it does now because charges get added for each item in the cart regardless of whether they're shown together or separately.

I just hit this problem also..glad to see I'm not alone. It's a must that the shipping be combined and calculated on the total weights for all products ordered, instead of seperately! Glad to see it's being fixed.

Your issue is that you want to charge x amount for the first item and y amount for additional items.  That's not what this post is about.  When CCP5 was first released (prior to the 08/17 update) shipping was done per item and like shipping addresses and methods were not grouped together.  What you're trying to do is different.

___________________________

Nick Hendler
Webmaster, Kryptronic, Inc.

Hi there,

I have followed thru the discussion and agree totally to the new changes or should i add a word that it could be options to the various user of ccp5.

I have posted another message in regards to NON US to maybe US or NON US to NON US.

Will this be handled as well?

Thanks