shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Les Hazlewood <lhazlew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Ini config: Rename [main] section to [beans] ?
Date Sun, 09 May 2010 03:33:07 GMT
Sounds good :)

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would agree with Erik. Bean just doesn't exist in Shiro vocabulary
> so why introduce it now. "main" may or may not be a weak choice but
> that's what it's been and we don't know now any better what the future
> holds, so I'd be inclined to just leave it as "main".
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
>> Ah, interesting Erik - that could work too.  Thanks for the feedback!
>>
>> If anyone else wants to offer feedback, please do so soon - I hope to
>> wrap this up as soon as possible to be code complete for 1.0 by Monday
>> at the latest.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Les
>>
>> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Erik Beeson <erik.beeson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I understand what you're saying, but "beans" doesn't seem very meaningful in
>>> the context of Shiro. I think "config" (which would be a bit redundant) or
>>> "setup" might make more sense. Or leave it "main" and have a new global
>>> options section be called "options" or "settings" or something?
>>>
>>> In the end, I don't think it matters much. We'll use whatever you do :)
>>>
>>> --Erik
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Juan,
>>>>
>>>> I think you might have missed my point:
>>>>
>>>> The [main] section today IS the same thing as a Spring-style
>>>> configuration - it just uses INI instead of XML.  It configures
>>>> JavaBeans and builds object graphs and nothing else.  That's why I'd
>>>> like to change the name to [beans] - so the section name correctly
>>>> reflects the current behavior.
>>>>
>>>> I also wanted to change the name so that if we ever decided to bring
>>>> back the [main] section, it could be used for things other than
>>>> beans-style configuration.  You can't mix them both in the same
>>>> section.
>>>>
>>>> Does that make sense?
>>>>
>>>> Les
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Juan Chung <jiayanchung@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>> > [beans] is a more general name, it likes spring-style configuration.
so
>>>> > it cannot clearly express this section's function in Shiro.
>>>> >
>>>> > but [main] is a more meaningful name for Shiro, it tells the end-user
it
>>>> > lies in the Core of Shiro, without it Shiro will not be able to work.
>>>> >
>>>> > I think [main] is a better name than [beans] in Shiro.
>>>> >
>>>> > On 2010-5-9 7:27, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The [main] section now exists for the sole purpose of java-beans-style
>>>> >> creation, configuration, and object graph assembly.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Because of this, I'm thinking the [main] section should be renamed
to
>>>> >> [beans] to indicate this.  The idea is that it is easily conceivable
>>>> >> that we'll need a [main] section at some time for framework-wide
>>>> >> directives that might not be able to be represented as a bean/property
>>>> >> configuration line.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thoughts?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Les
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message