feat: add a pypi distrubution

[trim21]

context: #768 (comment)

this should work as expected on windows

when compiled as a extension, the Python::attach will re-use current python interpreter

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 77.08333% with 242 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.29%. Comparing base (7e57e56) to head (f670dd8).
⚠️ Report is 29 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/lsp/src/lib.rs	42.42%	57 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/providers/definition.rs	65.45%	57 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/handlers.rs	0.00%	38 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/providers/inlay_hints.rs	82.96%	23 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/providers/hover.rs	89.89%	20 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/providers/formatting.rs	89.14%	19 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/providers/completion.rs	90.07%	13 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/server.rs	50.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/beancount_data.rs	94.11%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/lsp/src/capabilities.rs	90.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #778      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    76.86%   77.29%   +0.42%     
===========================================
  Files           26       28       +2     
  Lines         9913    10798     +885     
===========================================
+ Hits          7620     8346     +726     
- Misses        2293     2452     +159     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
crates/lsp/src/providers/references.rs	93.75% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/lsp/src/providers/semantic_tokens.rs	95.04% <94.73%> (+0.49%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/main.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (-43.30%)	⬇️
crates/lsp/src/beancount_data.rs	93.18% <94.11%> (+0.13%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/capabilities.rs	84.54% <90.00%> (+0.74%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/server.rs	36.13% <50.00%> (+0.42%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/providers/completion.rs	83.45% <90.07%> (+0.80%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/providers/formatting.rs	88.71% <89.14%> (+1.20%)	⬆️
crates/lsp/src/providers/hover.rs	89.89% <89.89%> (ø)
crates/lsp/src/providers/inlay_hints.rs	83.31% <82.96%> (-0.79%)	⬇️
... and 3 more

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[trim21]

@polarmutex any opinions on this?

[trim21]

@polarmutex any opinion? if you don't like this idea I can close it

[polarmutex]

@trim21 I am still thinking about this, not sure having a python release with pyo3 is worth added complexity.

I am sorry if I have not responded quick enough, I am really busy and try to review and support this project.

I would like to try to make a great project with your support , I do not like you making a separate repo that is a close clone of this one.

What do you want the LSP to do that is not working for you in vscode?

[polarmutex]

@trim21 to say this again, let me know how we can work together and make a great LSP for beancount.

[trim21]

There are multiple reasons I decide to write a new LSP server, this PR is not one of them.

My final goal is to replace current c parser with a rust parser in beancount upstream, so I have a seprated parser in my beancount repo's rust branch, which is not polarmutex/tree-sitter-beancount. so in the future there will be a gap between this LSP and the new rust parser.

Also you like to do a force push on my pr's base branch, I know you are rebasing develop branch on master branch, but it will cause conflicts on un-related files and I don't want to resolve them. for example, I didn't touch any of these files in this PR:

Another reason is that this LSP is pretty "feature-completed" to me, it already cover all use-case of mine, I'd like to do some experiments on my own repo.

if we have a pypi distrubution that linked to python is a small thing.

[polarmutex]

PyPI distribution support is a valuable addition for users who install via pip. This is a large PR (+2061/-317 lines). I'll schedule a proper review.

A few initial questions:

1. Does the CI workflow cover the PyPI build on all supported platforms?
2. What's the release process — is this published alongside the existing binary releases?
3. The PR description mentions Windows compatibility via Python::attach — are there integration tests?

I'll do a full review this week.