ietf-nntp Another message from urs@akk.org about tin

[Lee Kindness]

urs at akk.org writes (via Stan O. Barber):
 > tin threas all greetingcodes != 200 or 201 as an error:
 >       case OK_CANPOST:
 > #  ifndef NO_POSTING
 >          can_post = TRUE;
 > #  endif /* !NO_POSTING */
 >          break;
 > 
 >       case OK_NOPOST:
 >          can_post = FALSE;
 >          break;
 > 
 >       default:
 >          if (ret < 0) {
 >             error_message (_(txt_failed_to_connect_to_server), nntp_server);
 >          } else {
 >             error_message (line);
 >          }

tin is in error then. Given that 2?? signifies a successful command,
is it too much to assume that an unknown 2?? code should be treated as 
general success?

We shouldn't bastardise the new spec to match BROKEN 'current
practice'.