Re: pip install scons

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Bill Deegan <bill-cJFiu+DHMVC5azolltMz9laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> One question for the user base would be if anyone uses this ability anymore?
> If not, good let's drop it.
>
> I'm all for moving to a pip based install as the primary method, with
> scons-local still supported.
> Though perhaps single file scons-local would be useful and/or better?
>
> Thoughts?

First, the status quo needs to be documented - blog post or something.
It took me few years to figure SCons installation scenarios,  and I am
still not 100% sure that I get everything right, especially on Linux/OS X.

I would drop hacks to install multiple versions of SCons into single
Python environment in favor of using multiple environments.

Then I would also consider refactoring SCons-local to SCons portable
making current codebase portable by default, so that you can run
SCons as a Python package.

Speaking of portability, I'd also experiment with modular SCons
structure - make a version that consists of core with all tools stripped
and an ability to quickly add/discover/embed modules to that.

So that people can construct their maintainable set and checkin
it to their repository.

So, goals:

1. one SCons per Python

2. easy override with own importable SCons
(own SCons committed to repository)

3. describe SCons installation scenarios

4. refactor SCons-local to copy of repository source

5. experiment with modular structure

P.S. I am getting back to it from
https://github.com/GodotBuilder/godot-builds/pull/2