One of our team has implemented loading properties this way (see pseudo code below) and advises this approach is right as the client application using this is free to keep t
I'm not sure why a PropertyPlaceholderConfigurator wouldn't have been the correct choice.
I've almost always handled environment-specific configs via a customized PPC that can either (a) get a -D parameter on startup, and/or (b) use the machine name, to decide which property file to load.
For me, this is more convenient than bundling the information in via Maven, since I can more easily test arbitrary configurations from whatever machine I'm on (using a -D property).