Source-less python distributions + PEP3147

PEP 3147 (https://peps.pythondiscord.com/pep-3147/) makes mention of "continue to support source-less distributions" by using legacy pyc file placements when no py file is adjacent. Blurb here: https://peps.pythondiscord.com/pep-3147/#case-4-legacy-pyc-files-and-source-less-imports

What is not clear is if the term "legacy" applies to just the pyc file placement or if it applies to both the pyc file placement and source-less distributions.

Are source-less distributions first-class citizens in terms of support? They're often used for embedded environments (Buildroot, for example, generates a source-less distribution) so it would make sense that they are supported.

If source-less distributions are first-class citizens and should continue to be supported, is there documentation about what that implies for consumers of a distribution? Some things that we've seen are:

• Packages trying to symlink to .py files vs building a wrapper script that imports a module to execute code
• Modules making assumptions that a .py file which may-or-may-not exist can be executed directly

Start by reading PEP 3147, especially the section on legacy pyc files and source-less imports, then review the examples from Buildroot and the packaging behaviors described in the issue. Clarify whether source-less distributions are fully supported and document the implications for consumers, including symlinks to .py files and wrapper scripts.