[NNTP] Revisiting POST as a separate capability

[Jeffrey M. Vinocur]

On Mar 24, 2005, at 1:35 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:

> Clive D W Feather <clive at demon.net> writes:
>
>> Yes, there's nothing inconsistent about POST without READER, but do we
>> want to encourage it? I would suggest that we don't.
>
> I don't think this constitutes encouragement, just making it possible.

Why don't we want to encourage it, anyway?


> After thinking about this for a while, I do think we should make it
> possible (although it's not sufficiently important enough to me to 
> argue
> against a consensus if people disagree).

Perhaps I'll be convinced by the debate, but at the moment I don't see 
any reason to forbid it.  (I mean, if we did forbid it, a server that 
theoretically wanted to do this could simply provide hardcoded versions 
of READER commands that return responses consistent with a server 
having no groups -- and a client could still try to post if it wanted 
to.  Sure, it's a strange thing to do, but nothing in the -protocol- 
makes me think it's a problem.)

-- 
Jeffrey M. Vinocur
jeff at litech.org