[Evolution] Bug 18387 and the inverse

[Rob Walker <rob myinternetplace net>]

I thought I had asked this before, but I can't find it in the archives,
so here goes.

I like the idea of what bug 18387 and the included patches add to
evolution.  I would ask for a couple of things, the first one is that
18387 is integrated and that the inverse is created.  The inverse that I
think would be amazing is best explained in the help file for VM, a mail
reader for [X]Emacs.

On my machine, the file /usr/share/xemacs21/packages/lisp/vm/vm-vars.el
has the following information:

"

(defvar vm-visible-headers
  '("Resent-"
    "From:" "Sender:"
    "To:" "Apparently-To:" "Cc:"
    "Subject:"
    "Date:")
  "*List of headers that should be visible when VM first displays a
message.
These should be listed in the order you wish them presented.
Regular expressions are allowed.  There's no need to anchor
patterns with \"^\", as searches always start at the beginning of
a line.  Put a colon at the end of patterns to get exact matches.
For example, \"Date\" matches \"Date\" and \"Date-Sent\".  Header names
are always matched case insensitively.

If the value of `vm-invisible-header-regexp' is nil, only the
headers matched by `vm-visible-headers' will be displayed.
Otherwise all headers are displayed except those matched by
`vm-invisible-header-regexp'.  In this case `vm-visible-headers'
specifies the order in which headers are displayed.  Headers not
matching `vm-visible-headers' are display last.")

(defvar vm-invisible-header-regexp nil
  "*Non-nil value should be a regular expression that tells what headers
VM should NOT normally display when presenting a message.  All other
headers will be displayed.  The variable `vm-visible-headers' specifies
the presentation order of headers; headers not matched by
`vm-visible-headers' are displayed last.

Nil value causes VM to display ONLY those headers specified in
`vm-visible-headers'.")

"

I hope that the lisp and the explanations are clear.  If they are not,
please let me know, and I will try to be more clear.


thanks,
rob