On 19.02.2014 00:14, anatoly techtonik wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Dirk Bächle <tshor...@gmx.de> wrote:
[...]
Okay, and when you have a simple SConstruct in a folder like
"/tmp/sconstest", change into this folder via "cd /tmp/sconstest" and then
call
python /full/path/to/scons/repo/bootstrap.py
, does that work in 2.3.0 without having libxml2/lxml installed or do you
see an error?
There is no error and should not be.
Good, so you are able to develop SCons and run a checked-out, or even
modified, version of SCons against a build project, right?
Because in your earlier mail you said:
"
My opinion is that by adding additional dependencies to run the SCons
without errors from a fresh checkout we are significantly increasing
contribution
barrier and discouraging people from participating.
People need to checkout and run to see the power of SCons. Not read,
checkout, install, setup, run cycle. Something like this.
"
But this is obviously not the case. When following the first
instructions in the top-level README.rst, people are able to call SCons
without installing it and without having to resolve any further
dependencies. So there is actually no reason to fear that users or
first-time developers get a bad first impression of SCons, when they try
to use the latest development version.
Can you see that too, and agree with me that we don't have a real
problem in this very specific use case (cloning the repo, and calling
SCons directly)?
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
