jcombs_31

I think this is what I was looking for. Was having a mental block. Thanks ignace. I think though this leads to an additional table. Table 2 in my scenario also has additional data, for example notes, creation date, etc...

What I'm really doing is creating an enum of sorts. I just need that enum to be flexible which is why I'm using another table to populate it. The extraneous data is someone irrelevant. Ultimately this is a relation between 2 tables. <table1> id action <table2> id field1 field2 field3 .... The values for table2 will be driven from the options available in table1.

Ok, I for whatever reason just feel like I'm going about the design wrong, I guess because I never had to build a table like this. We use an internal system with a number of fields that we need to conduct reviews on. Each of these will be 'graded' with a follow up action. I guess this is the only real way to do it, just wanted to be sure. Thanks for the answer.

I'm thinking maybe I'm going about this wrong, so here it goes. I have a table, lets call it actions, defined with only a couple fields (id, summary). Data would be like: 1 Update 2 Follow Up 3 Close .... I have a table with a number or fields that would reference actions. Ultimately this is for a review of sorts. I need to have about 10-15 fields reference the available 'actions' as defined in the actions table. Would I have to define each foreign key separately, or is there a better way to accomplish what I want. Table 2 has a number for foreign keys. field 1 => action field 2 => action field 3 => action So the constraints look like foreign key (field1) references actions(id) foreign key (field2) references actions(id) foreign key (field3) references actions(id) I thought this could be written as: foreign key(field1, field2, field2) references actions(id), but apparently I was sadly mistaken. I've been away from any type of dev for a while, so any thoughts would be appreciated.

...and many people would argue the same about you still being on Windows XP...it was released like 9 years ago, and has been since replaced twice over...first with Vista (about 4 years ago) and now by Windows 7 (been out for over a year now...). No offense dude...if you wanna continue to use XP then more power to you, but I don't think you really have room to complain about IE9 not being compatible with XP. Agreed. Pretty ignorant argument to begin with. People love to bash MS without praising them for recognizing their mistakes and getting better.

Be more specific in your use case. Why use an array for a single variable?

I would suggest using Bake to create your associations if you do not know how to do it manually. http://book.cakephp.org/view/113/Code-Generation-with-Bake

http://www.beautyoftheweb.com/

Cool, thanks guys. I've used trac but never set it up myself. I don't need anything complex, its really just for small projects but I'm trying to get a little more organized since I have a million things going on.

What bugtracker do you guys recommend for projects? I was taking a look at Mantis. http://www.mantisbt.org/

http://gallery.menalto.com/

I'm assuming you added delivery to the database? Did you clear the model cache in tmp?

You have to pass the value from your controller to the view for it to be accessible.

Looks like Microsoft is making strides... http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/

Did you read the first line of code on the page? <?php e( $countryList->select('country', 'Please select your country'));?>

When you say drop down are you referring to a select box in a form? If you submit the form, they will be in the data array. If you want to pass values to a view, you have to use $this->set('name', $value). You could just pass the data array and parse as necessary. And what version of cake are you using, thtml pages are deprecated.

If you have to access outside of the document root there is no reason not to use just 1 install of the cake core files. You will still need 2 app folders, one for each site, but both config files will point to the cake php core files.

You may want to check out process explorer, can give you more details and kill the entire process tree if you wish. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

Can't you just use a simple BOOL flag. When something is created set it to 0 by default and don't display it. If approved switch the flag to 1.

I believe he already told you what to do!

Also doesn't sound like you are using the MVC structure correctly. You should just set the variable in your controller function to make it available to the view.

I scalped my forehead about 9 years ago in a car accident, but never took any pictures. It was pretty nasty and took about a year to really heal up. Almost had to get a graft. But yes, i'm glad it is Friday too!

Uploading and resizing is done on the server, not the client. There are probably a million and one free examples and scripts online if you did a simple google search.

This is true, but lengthy contracts can also scare aware small business owners. Once you start discussing the limits of the contract they may just decide to go elsewhere. Sure, maybe you avoided a pain in the ass client, but you also lost work. I think you have to walk a thin line with what is in your contract and what your willing to do for a customer.

Really, enough said that a site under development is missing a view? Yea, from an earlier version. I have to clean up some of the data.