Re: svn commit: r818748 - in /incubator/pdfbox/fontbox/trunk: LICENSE.txt NOTICE.txt pom.xml src/main/appended-resources/ src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/ src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/LICENSE src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/NOTICE

[Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>]

Thanks for the explanation! I'll defer to the Maven-addicts then.

On 25.09.2009 10:18:09 Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> > why is this duplication necessary? There's quite a risk now that one of
> > the two NOTICE file is updated at some point and the other isn't.
> 
> The appended-resources mechanism comes from the latest
> org.apache:apache parent POM and integrates quite nicely with the
> default build lifecycle without us needing explicit POM customizations
> to get the licensing metadata included in the build result.
> 
> It's especially nice for multi-module projects where each produced
> binary may have different licensing metadata, but only a single top
> level LICENSE/NOTICE pair is needed to cover the source distribution.
> The unfortunate corollary of this feature is that for a
> single-component project the licensing metadata typically (though not
> always) is the same for the source and binary packages which leads to
> this duplication.
> 
> These files don't change too often and any changes should in any case
> be carefully considered, so I'm personally fine with the need for
> increased effort to avoid inconsistencies due to the duplication. On
> the other hand I don't feel too strongly about this, so I can
> reintroduce the previous mechanism if people prefer that.
> 
> BR,
> 
> Jukka Zitting




Jeremias Maerki