Forgot to add debian-devel back in the loop On 02/24/2015 10:29 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 06:44:54 +0000 Nick Papior Andersen > <nickpapior@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In my experience many of the features are quite similar. >> >> However, > netcdf4-python has the advantage of full CDF4 capabilities. >> Konrads > excellent package allows reading a NetCDF4 format in "CLASSIC" >> format, it > also allows writing the CDF3 and CDF3-64 bit files. But it does >> not allow > writing the full NetCDF4 format (I do not know if he has just >> implemented > it, but last time I checked, 2.9.3, he hadn't). > > > > The netCDF interface in ScientificPython has no support for the > functionality specific to netCDF4, for two reasons: (1) I don't need it > and (2) I want to maintain compatibility with netCDF3, which is (or at > least used to be a while ago) much less problematic to install than > netCDF4 with its enormous dependency (HDF5). > > I cannot dedicate much energy to netCDF support because I am migrating > my own software to a direct use of HDF5. I continue to support netCDF > merely for keeping my legacy software usable. I'd be happy to abandon my > netCDF interface in the long run and use netcdf4-python for my legacy > code. However, the last time I checked, this didn't look like a viable > option. > > For the pure Python interface, I could probably replace > Scientific.IO.NetCDF by a thin wrapper on top of netcdf4-python. But for > the C interface, I do not see a solution. I have application code (the > Molecular Modelling Toolkit, http://dirac.cnrs-orleans.fr/MMTK/) that > accesses a single opened netCDF file both from Python code and from C > extension modules. To make this work portably, supporting shared > libraries on all platforms, the C API calls must pass through the C > extension module that is linked to the netCDF library. Last time I > checked, netcdf4-python did not support this. Is there perhaps a > different solution for this scenario? > > Konrad. Thanks very much to Nick and Konrad for your help here. I think there is enough extra functionality in netcdf4-python (and I probably should change the package name to include the 4) to warrant the effort involved in maintaining netcdf4-python in Debian. Checking the reverse dependencies of python-netcdf in Debian, I can see that there are three other packages depending on it: python-tables, python-mmtk and python-dolfin (all in the Debian Science Team). So it would not make sense to remove python-netcdf at this point in time. But as long as there are no namespace clashes, I see no reason to not have both in the archive. Cheers, Ross
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature