Editorial suggestion: rename "fetch finale"

[noamr]

I found the term "fetch finale" confusing when I was a newbie to the fetch spec.

Especially with #1412, but even before, the fetch finale is not exactly the end of the fetch.
It's more of a middle point where the fetch hands over processing back to the client, which will eventually either conclude, abort or terminate the fetch.

I propose to rename it to "respond" or "hand over".

[annevk]

Well yes, but it's also the logical end of the fetch algorithm, right? At that point we have identified a response, perform the final checks, and return it. It's not the end of networking activity though so I can see how it might be confusing.

I would prefer this being some name with "fetch" in it, similar to the other fetch algorithms. Perhaps "handle fetch response" although I guess that could be confusing with SW's "handle fetch".

Would "fetch response finale" give the same confusion? I guess "fetch response handover" (no space in handover) isn't too bad either.

[noamr]

Well yes, but it's also the logical end of the fetch algorithm, right? At that point we have identified a response, perform the final checks, and return it. It's not the end of networking activity though so I can see how it might be confusing.

I would prefer this being some name with "fetch" in it, similar to the other fetch algorithms. Perhaps "handle fetch response" although I guess that could be confusing with SW's "handle fetch".

Would "fetch response finale" give the same confusion? I guess "fetch response handover" (no space in handover) isn't too bad either.

I think my issue is with the word "finale" rather than with the word "fetch". It's finale of the fetch algorithm, but later the conclude/finalize/terminate is still sort-of part of the "fetch" even though it's not part of the algorithm.

"fetch response handover" sounds good to me