[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
