Build: adding support for distribution via Python package

[timlehr]

Feature

This adds support for building and distributing Raven as a Python package. While this might seem a bit odd given that Raven currently doesn't have any Python dependencies, it has some distinct advantages:

• easily installed using pip just like the other OTIO repos
• tools like UV will enable running Raven with a single command (no cloning needed) once we publish it to PyPI

# clone the code
git clone --recursive https://github.com/OpenTimelineIO/raven.git
cd raven

# run Raven using UV from local code
uv run --no-editable raven example.otio

# build wheel using UV (wheel file will be in ./dist)
uv build # add '--python <python_version>' to build for a specific Python version

# run Raven directly off PyPi
uvx opentimelineio-raven raven example.otio

Other Changes

• Raven version is now read from VERSION.txt instead of being hardcoded into CmakeList

Next steps

• Dist: Setup publish to PyPi Github workflow #135

[apetrynet]

This is going to be awesome!
Sadly, I was unable to build on my machine as I have gtk4+ only, but I trust the CI is a good indication of it working.
Left a couple of comments

[apetrynet]

This setup differs a bit from the adapters. I think the token approach is deprecated for instance.

[timlehr]

I haven't been able to test this at all. I mostly copied it over from the core repo - I was contemplating using uv publish here, but somebody has to give me an intro into how we test this stuff for the OTIO org.

[apetrynet]

Yeah, I need to attend that intro myself.
However I think using uv publish will need the same authentication method.
Perhaps setting up this workflow should be its own PR where we can set it up correctly?

Being able to run raven via uv like described in the README.md is a good first step

[timlehr]

Yeah, do you want me to remove the publish.yaml or still keep it for now?

[apetrynet]

I'm leaning towards removing it as it needs a couple of iterations to get working correctly.
In this case we should submit a ticket targeted towards getting publishing up and running.

Just remember to adjust the readme if we go this route.

The PR still has a lot of value as it lowers the entry "cost" for getting Raven running.

What do you think @jminor?

[timlehr]

Removed and opened issue #135

[timlehr]

@apetrynet can you build the regular way via cmake on your machine? I tried to make almost no changes to the build steps itself and just pipe the builds through to Python. The Linux pipeline requires some dependencies - I wonder if we need to add your setup to the matrix, if it's a popular configuration?

[apetrynet]

I haven't tried building manually, but it looks like the cmake files indicate gtk3
I'm on Debian Trixie which is gtk4.

I'm not sure what distros like Rocky 9 use? But if they also provide gnome desktop in the 40+ range we should look into upping the gtk requirement.

[timlehr]

Yeah, maybe we make that a separate issue? Seems like there is some investigation to be done.

[apetrynet]

LGTM, but someone able to build the package should perhaps have a look before we hit merge?

[jminor]

Suggested change

	os: [ ubuntu-latest, ubuntu-24.04-arm, windows-latest, macos-13, macos-latest ]
	os: [ ubuntu-latest, ubuntu-24.04-arm, windows-latest, macos-14, macos-latest ]

[timlehr]

Oh, I didn't see this one up here before pressing merge ... I will add it to the publish PR.

[jminor]

This looks great. I'm checking with ASWF regarding the policies about release artifacts vs distribution.

[jminor]

ASWF representative says we can go ahead with this, and publish to PyPI as well.