On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 17:27 +0300, Andy Smith wrote: > We need to add these codes to maintain compliance. > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-new-status-02
I don't see that we *need* to maintain "compliance". I see this more as a useful set of extended HTTP status codes that we can use, if we wish, for the purposes outlined in the draft...assuming it becomes approved. The only compliance that we really need to maintain is with our own API spec, and of course making sure we don't violate HTTP (which is pretty darn liberal). -- Kevin L. Mitchell <[email protected]> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
