What would be the benefit of doing such? _Bill
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:28 PM, William Blevins <wblevins...@gmail.com> wrote: > Technically, they are just python scripts, but it's not my call to make, > so hopefully a senior dev will chime in :) > > SConstruct is a required name, but SConscript is not even though it may be > the standard/convention. The subscripts can use any name you like > technically. I usually include the "*.py" extension so that language > bindings in editors work without setting changes. > > V/R, > William > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Carnë Draug <carandraug+...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi >> >> scons [1] is a build system and I was thinking of adding it to >> shared-mime-info. Its files are very simple to identify, they are >> always named SConstruct or SConscript. These files are also valid >> python scripts. >> >> Should shared-mime-info identify them (I can submit a git patch, no >> problem) or should SCons itself add a rule when they are installed? >> I am guessing that a SCons mimetype would be "text/x-scons" is that >> correct? Or should they be identified only as python scripts? >> >> I saw there are rules for make and cmake so I thought that adding >> to shared-mime-info would be the way to go. >> >> Thank you >> Carnë >> >> [1] http://www.scons.org/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Scons-dev mailing list >> Scons-dev@scons.org >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > Scons-dev@scons.org > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
