> 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
