[NNTP] LISTGROUP wording

[Ken Murchison]

Clive D.W. Feather wrote:

> Ken Murchison said:
> 
>>>>>Have we decided if LISTGROUP is going to be mandatory to implement if
>>>>>READER is advertised?
> 
> 
>>>Do Andrew's comments count as an objection? If so, what happens next?
>>
>>Obviously, I'm not going to speak for Andrew, but I took his comments as 
>>a possible objection to the LISTGROUP initial response line changing 
>>format, not an objection to making LISTGROUP mandatory.
> 
> 
> He pointed out that he wasn't storing the group name anywhere. I assumed
> that made LISTGROUP (no arguments) hard to implement.

True.  Can we just make the group name required for both GROUP and 
LISTGROUP?  As we stated before, its hard to believe that the client 
doesn't know what group is currently selected, so using [LIST]GROUP with 
no argument seems like unnecessary functionality.  Furthermore, since 
LISTGROUP selects the group in the same way as GROUP, it doesn't make 
any sense to me that a client would waste a roundtrip and/or bandwidth 
by sending "GROUP <group>" followed by "LISTGROUP" (whether pipelined or 
not).

I supposed we'd have to solicit client authors to see if anybody 
actually uses LISTGROUP with no argument in practice.

-- 
Kenneth Murchison     Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer     21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26      Orchard Park, NY 14127
--PGP Public Key--    http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp