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 <d...@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
