[NNTP] Revisiting POST as a separate capability

[Peter Robinson]

Charles Lindsey <chl at clerew.man.ac.uk> wrote:

> Then let LISTGROUP have its own capabilities (for consistency and
> avoidance of confusion),

Fine (assuming it remains optional).

> but say somewhere that "The LISTGROUP capability
> MUST NOT be advertised if the READER capability is not advertised also".

We could say that, but what for?  There's probably no good[1] reason to
have LISTGROUP without READER, but just because I can't think of one,
why should we write that assumption into the protocol?  What harm does
it do to allow some server to advertise only LISTGROUP, on some
connections, if that really is all it wants to provide?

Regards,

Peter

[1] I can think of at least two bad ones.