Replace liblo with python-osc

[ideoforms]

pyliblo appears to have become unmaintained, has problematic dependencies and generates warnings.
Switch to python-osc.

[Itaborala]

I'm working on that! I forked the repo to make the pyliblo -> python-osc transplant surgery.

Check po_server.py here. Still making the transition, but my preliminary results are promising. I'm able to /sync, and also send messages. Handlers still not re-implemented.

I have a separate project that requires communication with supercollider. Would be nice to have it without liblo.

[ideoforms]

Great! I'd welcome a PR if you are able to bring this to feature parity with the liblo version, with all tests passing etc.
Support for liblo would be removed at that point, so server.py could just be replaced with the python-osc implementation.

[Itaborala]

Update: server.py is working with python-osc with all tests passing! The liblo version was renamed to old_server.py

However, the handler structure got a bit messy, since python-osc uses a Dispatcher class for handling incoming messages. So my next step would be to refactor the _send_msg/_await_response receive structure. It is currently using threading Events to timeout the supercollider responses (and also capture the message with rv). I think I'll use asyncio for making asynchronous handlers using await and await_for() to replace await_response().

[Itaborala]

After some testing, still couldn't find any better option than just using the _await_response with a nested function as callback. Better to leave as is for now.

In any case, I think the last commit has made the new Server functional with python-osc, at least with the standard (and some other personal) tests using Buffer and Synth. Haven't made any further tests with Bus yet.

[ideoforms]

Nice one @Itaborala, really glad to see it coming along! I am keen to avoid making this library dependent on asyncio, as it adds additional burden on the user (as the rest of their Python program then has to spin up an async event loop) — so sticking with _await_response sounds good to me. Let me know when you have a PR that is ready for review, and I'll take a look over.

[ideoforms]

Now done and merged, thanks @Itaborala !