Re: [PATCH] log virgin HTTP request headers

On 01/29/2010 05:04 AM, Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 09:09 -0700, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>>> On 01/28/2010 06:07 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>>> Just a small thing: can I suggest s/virgin/pristine/ ? Or
>>>> s/virgin/received/ ?
>>> Pristine may work, but we (and other adaptation related documents) use
>>> virgin in many places already, including APIs.
>>>
>>> Received is a bad idea because an adapted message is also received.
>>>
>>>> virgin has a sexual connotation in some cultures, and can be confusing
>>>> in a way that is avoidable.
>>> Tell that to the Virgin Islands folks. :-)
>> It was a passing thought, I'm not like 'omg must be done' for this: I
>> certainly knew what it meant, but as its (AFAIK) the first config option
>> in squid to specify virgins, I see potential for confusion :) Other
>> possibilities:
>> - source
>> - external
>> - unaltered
>> - original
>
> Yep, I think we should use "original" for documentation.

FWIW, this naming issue was discussed when IETF OPES working group was
working on the ICAP replacement protocol. We started with the "original"
term. Some reviewers of the protocol specs did not like "original" for
several reasons. There were several replacement suggestions, including
virgin. At the end, RFC 4037 still said "original" (possibly because I
was too lazy to change the text!). Thus, if we use "original", we will
be at least consistent with OPES terminology...

I am fine with replacing virgin with original if others think it is a
good idea. Just do not tell Virgin Airlines or the virgin olive oil guys
 that they are using the wrong word :-).

Cheers,

Alex.
Received on Fri Jan 29 2010 - 16:35:38 MST