[Scons-dev] SCons doesn't bootstrap without libxml2

[anatoly techtonik]

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:

> On 19.02.2014 00:14, anatoly techtonik wrote:

>>

>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at 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?


No. The user experience is that the run failed while previously the
same user scenario worked without problem.


> 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.


The two things do not contradict.


> 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.


Ok. I'll correct myself. For users:
- read, checkout, read, run
+ checkout, run

For me:
- edit, runtests.py -a
+ edit, bootstrap.py


> 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.


Just make a corridor testing. Mine failed.


> 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)?


It depends on how seriously you take the user experience discipline, but
let's just say that I am a stubborn conservative freak and want the previous
behavior back. =)