Mailing-List: contact jsecurity-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jsecurity-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of p.ledbrook@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.92.144 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=RvYVHPH7eVzpDveOlHvCj+RVzskeNt3YN4EAFGs52NztwwNp3J18bFUEkEtgFX4ykH
         681ifVWS4qIE6p7wmSOa1rX28Rfy4FLmPPbTGf7sJx/4PAspqJS8jnV6AZvIO+vlVglS
         zF8NCODeNZEKrBtq5jcCOSLVdPeYZHG7z97Jo=
Message-ID: <d95c613f0810240812o1c1a0df3xd6b216766aa7f7c2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:12:53 +0100
From: "Peter Ledbrook" <peter@cacoethes.co.uk>
Sender: p.ledbrook@gmail.com
To: jsecurity-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: jsecurity status ...
In-Reply-To: <a32f6b020810240703o3833997coac33150ab29db5b9@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <4901B3F1.6090408@nextury.com>
	 <a32f6b020810240703o3833997coac33150ab29db5b9@mail.gmail.com>

> There's a lot of projects that will be java and security eventually.  No
> reason why jsecurity should take the general name as it's own.  I recommend
> finding another name for it.  For example we could have named Triplesec
> jsecurity but we did not because it would violate this spoken policy.

The name JSecurity has quite a bit of traction already in the Grails
community, so I think there would have to be a very good reason for
such a change. Certainly when I was looking for Java security
frameworks, only Acegi and JSecurity were the only serious candidates,
and Acegi seemed very web-centric, whereas JSecurity is a generic
security infrastructure. It certainly deserves the name in my view :)

Cheers,

Peter