On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 00:24, James Daugherty <jdaughe...@jdresources.net.invalid> wrote:
> Mattias made a good point in his open PR: there are other security > frameworks such as https://shiro.apache.org/. This convinced me to keep > the 'spring' in the name to be clear. > True. I still have this feeling though that everything spring related is the "default" choice for Grails, so no need to make it explicit. If we want to make it explicit I would prefer to keep grouping by semantics, not by technology, as we did with grails-data-*. So in this case it would be: org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-acl org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-cas org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-core org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-ldap org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-oauth2 org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-rest org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-rest-data org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-rest-grails-cache org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-rest-memcached org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-rest-redis org.apache.grails:grails-security-spring-ui org.apache.grails:grails-security-shiro-core org.apache.grails:grails-security-shiro-* It may be a bit counterintuitive since we are so used to "spring-security" but, in my brain at least, it looks more consistent with the rest of the grouping. Gianluca > -James >
