confusing double usage of the "source" configuration keyword

[henning]

"source:" is used to start the config part that defines the data source(s), but also to define the type of data source.
Why not name the latter just "type" or "sourcetype" or so? I think it's clearer not to reuse words for different useages.

[korenmiklos]

I second Hennin'gs suggestion, I was also confused a few times by the same. "type" sounds fine to me. Also, make sure to use consistent notation between source and target.