[Scons-dev] SCons Contrib Repository

[anatoly techtonik]

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Ivan Nedrehagen
<ivan.nedrehagen at loqal.no> wrote:

> På Thu, 27 Feb 2014 05:17:07 +0100, skrev anatoly techtonik

> <techtonik at gmail.com>:

>

>

>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:19 AM, Gary Oberbrunner

>> <garyo at oberbrunner.com> wrote:

>>>

>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Russel Winder <russel at winder.org.uk>

>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> On Tue, 2014-02-25 at 22:55 +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:

>>>> > Hi again,

>>>> >

>>>> > How about opening https://bitbucket.org/scons/contrib with various

>>>> > bits and pieces that people previously posted to Wiki? Tools and

>>>> > stuff. Learning be example may be much easier than by following the

>>>> > docs.

>>>>

>>>> Any code on the wiki should be removed, wikis are not the place for

>>>> code, version control repositories are the place for code.

>>>

>>>

>

> I must object on this.


Yes. If such repository exists, it is not a substitute for wiki - just a central
library. Wiki is better indexed by search engines, but code is better
maintained with source control.


> I beg you to consider that many companies developing software

> doesn't even use VCS for their own software, do you then expect them to

> learn how to pull a repository just for finding out how to make an emitter.


These are not software development companies. They may be anything else
but not this. I don't believe that company that doesn't use VCS can be
competitive. Their clients are just vendor-locked.


> I for my part would have had a hard time convincing my fellow developers

> from

> using Scons without showing them the vast amount of examples and snippets

> found

> on the Scons wiki and stackoverflow


Valid point.


>>>

>>> Yes, but.  Wikis are excellent places for snippets and small code chunks

>>> (think about stackoverflow for instance); creating a repo just for your

>>> little 10-line thing is worse: more effort and little to no gain.

>>> Anything

>>> larger than a single function though, I agree with you.

>>

>>

>> Sane diffs, history of changes and ability to browse with your editor is

>> good

>> for code regardless of its size. Repository has a lower entry barrier than

>> the

>> wiki. Also it is primarily for code that is more than 10-line thing.

>>

>

> All things considered, I think this is a discussion that should be placed on

> the user mailing list, as this affects the users more than the developers,

> and the usage pattern of the users should be the the decisive factor in such

> a matter.


Feel free to raise the question if a contrib/ repository would be useful. I am
less radical in that it should be replaced.


> For me ease of use is one of the strong points of Scons, the samples on the

> wiki reflects just that. For me, googling "Scons add dynamically" and finding

> a snippet that demonstrate an emitter is one of the joys of Scons.


Yes. SCons was much ahead of its time, because it concentrates on "user
experience" - discipline that even in 2014 didn't get much traction. Even docs
are written as tutorial. They really nice, but hard to reference.