Re: GOAWAY -> GTFO

On 29/1/14 6:25 PM, CIURANA EUGENE (pr3d4t0r) wrote:
>   
> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com  <mailto:adrian.f.cole@gmail.com?Subject=Re%3A%20GOAWAY%20-%3E%20GTFO&In-Reply-To=%3C1509C1A4-808B-4D44-BDB8-EBCB67902A30%40oracle.com%3E&References=%3C1509C1A4-808B-4D44-BDB8-EBCB67902A30%40oracle.com%3E>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> FWIW, when GTFO was suggested last week at the working group, all people
> >>> present had an opportunity to dissent and I heard not a single dissent
> >>> voiced!
> >>>
> >>> That said, I wouldn't conflate above PR/commit as a "popular move" as who
> >>> knows.. GOAWAY might actually lose a popular vote vs GTFO!
> >>>
> >>> That said, silencing the argument is likely a popular move, so maybe the
> >>> description still fits.
> I expressed this in the GitHub comments about the issue, echoing it here as well because this mailing list has a wider audience.
>
> Use of GTFO is fine.  Anyone arguing that because foreign speakers may not understand potential slang is being naïve or needs to get out more.  I've managed development teams in Moscow, Novosibirsk, Kiev, the San Francisco Bay Area, London, and Japan.  The use of slang or jargon derived from English in technical documentation, implementations, code, or configuration has never deterred anybody from applying the appropriate knowledge.  GOAWAY vs. GTFO -- if I were to implement a server or a client handler for this, I'd go for GTFO as the most meaningful (and perhaps get a secret chuckle, sure).
>
> So -- can we keep this instead?  Think of HTTP status code 418 IMATEAPOT (which is Russian slang for "I don't know what I'm doing").  Not many web servers or app servers implement it, granted, but it's part of the official spec.  And I've known teams in the US and Europe who've used 418 as a placeholder for an app RESTful handler that is only mocked up/yet to be implemented.
The issue is not that it would be misunderstood, but that it is 
inappropriate. It's not terribly offensive, just more offensive than it 
needs to be.

"GOAWAY" was clear, well understood, and I don't see why it needed to be 
changed.

We could always go with the classic name for this operation in Internet 
protocols and call it "HANGUP" or "HUP". Then all the young people will 
try to figure out what we are hanging and where, and conclude that it is 
an allusion to something dirty.

Yoav