You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pdfbox.apache.org by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> on 2009/09/25 10:18:09 UTC
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
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
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
Posted by 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