Caller ID Superfecta

I did some research on this today, and it doesn't appear that we can use this as a good source of SPAM info. Their service can report how many different sources reported on a given phone number, but it is not identifying those reports as spam.

I confirm and agree with what you say. The number of reports doesn't mean a thing - they could all be positive glowing happy reports, and this source would wax them right off the bat.

So, this Ticket will be rejected on the basis that there isn't any regularized, capturable data available from this site. (Same basic problem as for whocallsme.com, whose ticket I just got done rejecting.)

Also - I have created ticket: #91 to discuss how to handle depreciated sources.

I should also have said that this data source will stay in the Superfecta at this time, and not yet be depreciated. It presence doesn't harm anything - and some people may depend upon it.

Not sure exactly where to place this comment. But let's not lose focus on the purpose of the module which is to provide caller id. Flagging it as spam is just a nice feature. I personally do like whocalled.us with the modification of returning the caller name if it is found. Granted it is not always spam, but it DOES return many names for numbers which other cannot. I took the code with the latest release and modified it to return the caller name if found. It returns rather useful information. Take it for a spin.
If this isn't the right place, just delete and move it...

Ok Marv - We'll QA this. I have not yet reviewed it - Did you use the new source creation method as outlined here document#8, in the section called "--2.1.0+ Method--"? If not, would you please rework it so that it does meet those standards?

We hope to release the new version of Superfecta Friday May 22nd. Will you have time to make and required changes in that short span?

QA: FAIL. Written to previous standard. We will still QA and consider this code if you can rework it to the new standard as described in comment # 10 above.

Here is the current version of this script, already modified for the new standard. Perhaps it would be easiest for you to add your mods to this version. (Attached)

Assigned to Marv, moved back into version 2.1.0 timeline.

If we are to get this modification into the 2.1.0 build, well need it before sometime midday Friday at the lastest. Updated status and priority.

Oops, sorry Marv.

I just realized this was assigned, to you, but it's done now. I did some good testing on it, but someone else should verify real quick.

I also added the ability for the user to decide if they want to report the caller id back to who called or not. The ability to report back...and a bunch of people doing so, would essentially help create a large CID cache at Who Called.

Not sure about the new format. But my version uses a second get and different parameter on lines 25-27 to actually place the most reported name back into $caller_id. You change the getScore to getWho. That's the part that is great because it gives you the most reported name of the caller. I didn't see it in the version uploaded after mine. Simple fix?

According to: http://whocalled.us/about
"Returns who=Some name (most reported name by unique IP addresses)"

The getWho action returns the most reported name, which is what I built the query for.

I'm not sure if you're saying the script should be build differently? If you are, what difference are you suggesting?

The file I see above "source-Who_Called.php - WhoCalled Script - 2.1.0+ Method Style (1.9 KB) tshif, 05/21/2009 10:29 PM " does not have the "getWho" function in it. Is the updated file somewhere else or am I missing something?

My bad! I found the correct one in the repository. New to this system. It looks good to me. Good job!

QA: FAIL Data source no longer has a way to specify spam threshold

Spun off as ticket: #101

QA: Feedback to WhoCalled.US: SUCCESS/PASSED. The feed back to data source whocalled.us works as designed. However, only 15 characters were recorded by whocalled.us. Id this a limitation on our end, or is 15 characters all they accept?

Spun off as ticket #102

QA: Principle task - add caller ID text - has been completed.
There are bugs in the new code - they have been spun off to their own cases.
As the principle goal of this ticket has been achieved, it is being closed.