I filed an issue here though I am really not sure how to go about committing that change since the reception of Blender as a python module hasn’t really been warm for me when I bring up ways that bpy.so breaks the mold for the current build system.
I think the proper solution requires some bigger changes, for all platforms. It doesn’t make much sense to me to have a 2.83 folder in site-packages, or to have it directly in C:\Python37\ on Windows. Perhaps there can be a bpy folder in site-packages that contains both the module and 2.83 folder.
Maybe it’s worth noting (maybe it isn’t, too) when I add the 2.82 directory to to the list of scripts to be added to a Python wheel and build it, that installing from that wheel results in the following environments:
None of the above actually work in practice though for the obvious reasons…
FWIW (not much) but it would be my preference that much further down the line, one of two things happen:
bpy's set of additional scripts (the 2.82 folder) become part of package_data
Retrieving package_data is handled by Python to my knowledge: pkg_util.get_data() or something like
bpy's set of additional scripts becomes part of bpy itself, all addons are part of Blender’s site-packages folder to be installed by Blender through a modern package manager (like pip, or even I would go so far as to say it should be pip)
This is purely my preference and I have no idea what the plans are for Blender but I heard that 3.0 would be a Python package somewhere so I think it’s important to put out some considerations for what that means since currently the OS implications of bpy.so/.pyd are huge even though Python in and of itself is meant to be platform agnostic to a degree.
The forced hard coded path really makes the installation platform dependent.