joho
7XX-rfc
Makefile2012–2026
joho / 7XX-rfc
7XX-rfc
An RFC for a new series of HTTP status codes covering developer fouls.
21Distinct people
22Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
4.6KGitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
An RFC for a new series of HTTP status codes covering developer fouls.
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use was verified in the last source check.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by year22 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2012-01-22 22:04:14 UTC to 2026-06-08 05:17:25 UTC.
* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | 2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2013 | 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 6 | 4 | 2 |
| 2014 | 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 5 | 4 | 1 |
| 2015 | 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2016 | 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2018 | 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2019 | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2024 | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2025 | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2026 (partial) | 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
From the project README
An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.
Read the project’s introduction
RFC for 700 HTTP Status Codes
Barton Expires October 3, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft 7xxhttpcodes April 2018
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Developer Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Inexcusable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2. Novelty Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Edge Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.4. Fucking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.5. Reserved for meritocracy related bullshit . . . . . . . . 3
2.6. Syntax Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.7. Substance-Affected Developer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.8. Predictable Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.9. Somebody Else's Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.10. Internet crashed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
Some words and stuff. Reference to [RFC7231], looking to classify
500 series as unknown unknowns, and the 700 series as known unknowns.
1.1. Terminology
The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they appear in this
document, are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Developer Errors
2.1. Inexcusable
o 701 - Meh
o 702 - Emacs
o 703 - Explosion
o 704 - Goto Fail
o 705 - I wrote the code and missed the necessary validation by an
oversight (see 795)
o 706 - Delete Your Account
o 707 - Can't quit vi
2.2. Novelty Implementations
o 710 - PHP
o 711 - Convenience Store
o 712 - NoSQL
o 718 - I am not a teapot
o 719 - Haskell
2.3. Edge Cases
o 720 - Unpossible
o 721 - Known Unknowns
o 722 - Unknown Unknowns
o 723 - Tricky
o 724 - This line should be unreachable
o 725 - It works on my machine
o 726 - It's a feature, not a bug
o 727 - 32 bits is plenty
o 728 - It works in my timezone
2.4. Fucking
o 730 - Fucking npm
o 731 - Fucking Rubygems
o 732 - Fucking Unic💩de
o 733 - Fucking Deadlocks
o 734 - Fucking Deferreds
o 736 - Fucking Race Conditions
o 735 - Fucking IE
o 737 - FuckThreadsing
o 738 - Fucking Exactly-once Delivery
o 739 - Fucking Windows
o 738 - Fucking Exactly-once Delivery
2.5. Reserved for meritocracy related bullshit
74x TBD. Got the brains trust on the case.
2.6. Syntax Errors
o 750 - Didn't bother to compile it
o 753 - Syntax Error
o 754 - Too many semi-colons
o 755 - Not enough semi-colons
o 756 - Insufficiently polite
o 757 - Excessively polite
o 759 - Unexpected "T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM"
2.7. Substance-Affected Developer
o 761 - Hungover
o 762 - Stoned
o 763 - Under-Caffeinated
o 764 - Over-Caffeinated
o 765 - Railscamp
o 766 - Sober
o 767 - Drunk
o 768 - Accidentally Took Sleeping Pills Instead Of Migraine Pills
During Crunch Week
2.8. Predictable Problems
o 771 - Cached for too long
o 772 - Not cached long enough
o 773 - Not cached at all
o 774 - Why was this cached?
o 775 - Out of cash
o 776 - Error on the Exception
o 777 - Coincidence
o 778 - Off By One Error
o 779 - Off By Too Many To Count Error
2.9. Somebody Else's Problem
o 780 - Project owner not responding
o 781 - Operations
o 782 - QA
o 783 - It was a customer request, honestly
o 784 - Management, obviously
o 785 - TPS Cover Sheet not attached
o 786 - Try it now
o 787 - Further Funding Required
o 788 - Designer's final designs weren't
o 789 - Not my department
2.10. Internet crashed
o 791 - The Internet shut down due to copyright restrictions
o 792 - Climate change driven catastrophic weather event
o 793 - Zombie Apocalypse
o 794 - Someone let PG near a REPL
o 795 - #heartbleed (see 705)
o 796 - Some DNS fuckery idno
o 797 - This is the last page of the Internet. Go back
o 798 - I checked the db backups cupboard and the cupboard was bare
o 799 - End of the world
3. Informative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Railscamp crew, github contributors, etc
Author's Address
J. R. Barton
Railscamp
Email: jb@johnbarton.co
About
At Railscamp X it became clear there is a gap in the current HTTP specification.
There are many ways for a developer to screw up their implementation, but no code to share the nature of the error with the end user.
Building
Maintain RFC in 7xx.md
Relies on mmark to convert markdown to proper RFC format.
make
© John Barton 2012-17 CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
Read the full README on GitHubWhat Hacker News says
22 sources7XX HTTP Status Codes for Developer Fails
2 points · Open discussionThey left off RFC-6919 [0] The key words "MUST (BUT WE KNOW YOU WON'T)", "SHOULD CONSIDER", and "REALLY SHOULD NOT" are to be interpreted as described in RFC-6919
There is also the RFC for the 7xx HTTP status codes [1]
[0] - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6919
[1] - https://github.com/joho/7XX-rfc [language warning]
In Important RFCs, Humorous RFCsExtending HTTP status codes to include developer errors
1 points · Open discussionRFC for 700 HTTP Status Codes (2012)
225 points · Open discussion718 - I am not a teapot
https://github.com/joho/7XX-rfc/pull/180
In I’m A Teapot – HTTP status code 418RFC for the 7XX Range of HTTP Status Codes – Developer Errors
5 points · Open discussionRFC for the 7XX Range of HTTP Status codes – Developer Errors
1 points · Open discussionRFC for the 7XX Range of HTTP Status codes – Developer Errors
1 points · Open discussionRFC for the 7XX Range of HTTP Status codes: Developer Errors
7 points · Open discussionProposed extension to HTTP status codes
1 points · Open discussionside note: reminded me of some of these 7XX HTTP Status codes - Developer Errors https://github.com/joho/7XX-rfc
In HTTP 308 Incompetence ExpectedShowing the 15 most recent of 22 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.