Expected Behavior Webflux Security Documentation should be consistent with the examples and only use @EnableWebFluxSecurity without the additional @Configuration.

Current Behavior One example only uses @EnableWebFluxSecurity the rest use an additional @Configuration.

Context It makes it harder for the reader to understand if the @Configuration is needed or not. I suggest to keep it consistent and remove the @Configuration with a hint that @EnableWebfluxSecurity is already annotated with @Configuration.

Comment From: jsattler

11627

Comment From: sjohnr

Hi @jsattler. Apologies, I thought too quickly to merge your PR but went ahead and reverted it, due to gh-6613. However, I agree with you that it can be (and is) confusing to users. Because the plan is to remove the meta-annotation, I believe we will actually be reversing this throughout our documentation and adding the @Configuration to the examples in order to be consistent with the rest of Spring. With that in mind, I'm going to close this issue and add a note on gh-6613 to update the documentation.

If you're interested in working on that issue, feel free to add a comment over there as we'd love to have your help on it! Totally optional of course.