[imp] Lowercase "INBOX" in the menu

[Veronique Marchand]

> > Ok, I have created the en_US language packs and compiled them (both in
the
> > horde and imp directories), and I have also restarted Apache and my
browser,
> > but I still see no changes. :(
>
> That's a bummer.  I wouldn't expect it to change everywhere (not in folder
> listings for example) but I would expect it to change in some at least
> (e.g. the menu system).
>
> If you say where exactly you want it changed that it isn't changed, and
> what version you are using, I'll try to see what the issue is.

Ok, I'll try to be as specific as possible without overdoing it. I'm pretty
sure I must have done something wrong and will feel stupid after it will be
pointed out to me ;).
Versions: Horde 2.2.1 / IMP 3.2.1 / PHP 4.3.2
I went to the imp/po directory, ran xgettext and used "imp.pot" (which I
gathered as the default...), as the source file to create messages.po. I
renamed it en_US.po and ran make - got errors about no file found in Horde,
so I did the same thing in horde/po. Edited the headers (in both files),
then ran make in both folders, didn't get any errors. I restarted Apache,
restarted my browser.
I'm pretty sure that if I did something wrong it's something about the
xgettext. Was that the right input file?

>
> > As for editing the source code, I'm somewhat proficient in PHP (I made a
few
> > modifications of my own to IMP), so would it really be such a bad idea?
>
> Yes, unless:
>
> * You never plan to upgrade it
> * You really know what you are doing
>
> You see, the folder INBOX is a constant string, and used as such
> everywhere.  So you would have to make sure not to change that.  But
> you would have to find all the other references, and change those to
> your needs.  And hope that those to cases don't collide.  And doing so
> will be difficult due to the large number of times the string INBOX
> appears in the code.
>
> If you do change the code, then you are risking support from us, and
> potentially breaking any upgrades you do in the future.  Maybe not what
> you want to do.
>
> > admit not being too sure where too look though but I think I could
figure it
> > out...
>
> You'd be surprised how many times that string appears.  Might be harder
> to isolate it then you think.

Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, that would be painful to edit all these files
and probably not worth the risk. Unless my boss really really insists, which
I'm hoping he won't. ;)

Anyway, thanks again \m/  I'm sure I just overlooked something...