Anyone who can spell "dilettante" correctly is OK with me.
A true RBase dilettante,
Fred
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wills, Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 9:51 PM
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: conversion anomoly
MikeB, I hope I don't flatter myself by asking if "Steve" in your list means
me, as in "Steve in Memphis". At this point, while I have a similar regard
for Razzak, RBTI, and all of Y'All on this list, I do know that I am smart
enough to recognize that I often consider myself little better than a
dilettante (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dilettante) in these matters.
Now, if you meant, say, Steve McQueen, be he dead or hangin' with our own
hometown Elvis, lemme' offer an a priori mea culpa.
Regardless, I agree with your comments.
L8R,
Steve in Memphis
________________________________
From: [email protected] on behalf of MikeB
Sent: Fri 5/30/2008 5:24 PM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: conversion anomoly
Dennis,
Sorry I'm jumping in a little late, but I have been slaving for myself all
day
(hate when that happens!).
I think some perspective on how we have arrived at ver 7.6 might be helpful.
Even though you might find issues that seem a little quirky or illogical at
the
moment, you should know that most everything about RBase 7.6 / 8.0, is the
result of input from your peer group.
You have been here long enough to know that the way things are displayed or
dialoged, is through discussion in this forum usually, but not always,
arriving
at consensus on subject matter, and just like Magic, within days (and
sometimes
hours), how and what was described appears in the product.
Admittedly, sometimes it seems to be at odds with how everyone else does it,
but by and large, most things are as expected.
But the big picture is we have (collectively) advanced the product to a
state
that still elicits "oohs" and "aahs" from long time developers that thought
the
product was awful damn good at the 7.5 stage.
And to add further to that, I will bet that as long as Razzak remains above
ground, you can expect the product to continue to improve so long as the
faithful pursue it towards perfection.
There isn't anything you are going to go through in the conversion process
that
the dozens of able and selfless people here like Dawn, Bill, Emmitt,
Claudine,
Javier, Adrian, Gunnar, Steve, James, Larry, and many more, have not already
done before.
Their individual experiences through trials by fire are at the ready to help
you any time you need it in the very same way you would do for anyone else.
Mike
Thanks, Dawn,
That helps a little.
In that case I would expect with a one-to-many property set, my third
table
would never show any data since it had no linking column to the first
table!
Instead, it pulled all the rows in the third table. Obviously, more light
needs to be shed on this property!
And, the many-to-many should be the default option, since it is the one
most
likely to be used.
Dennis McGrath
----------
From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 12:49 PM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: conversion anomoly
Ya - that's one of those things that's not instinctive, since it differs
from
the standard definition fo one to many and many to many.
Basically, it's TABLES instead of RECORDS: With one to many, it means I
can
link one table to many tables. With "many to many", it means I can have
many
tables linking to many tables.
I'm sure that's not the "definition", but that's how I learned to remember
to
check that box!
Dawn Hast
Dennis McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/30/2008 01:09:52 PM:
> Dawn,
>
> That was it!
>
> LOL! I check the help and it is not much help.
>
> What exactly does the "one to many" option do? The result
> definitely does not look logical to me in any way.
> The help does not tell me anything useful!
>
> Thanks
> Dennis
>
>
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 11:44 AM
> To: RBASE-L Mailing List
> Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: conversion anomoly
>
>
> Dennis,
>
> Make sure you have "Many to Many" checked under Form Properties >
> Table Relations.
>
> Dawn Hast
>
>
>
> Dennis McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/30/2008 12:40:20 PM:
>
> > I'm doing my first conversion from RBDOS 7.5 to RBWIN 7.6
> >
> > I have a 3 table form with 3 regions
> >
> > RBWIN 6.5++ (latest version 1.866) converted the dos form fine. I
> > tweaked the scrolling regions a bit and the form works great.
> >
> > I converted that form to 7.6 (latest version 3.30516)
> >
> > The third scrolling region does not link up correctly, it shows all
> > the records in the third table, not just the records that link to
> > table 2
> >
> > Any way I can fix this short of removing the region and table and
> > adding it back manually?
> > I sure don't want to do this for all my 3+ forms!!!
> >
> > Finally trying to catch up!
> > Dennis McGrath
> >
> >
