Re: netCDF Strategy
FYI, mail from Unidate as of May last year concerning libCF.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Unidata netCDF Support <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:05 PM
Subject: [netCDF #MFY-950093]: libCF download?
> libCF used to be included into netCDF, but it seems that it isn't
> anymore, cf. <https://github.com/unidata/netcdf-c>.
Right, Unidata support for libCF development was halted about 2 years
ago, after the primary developer left Unidata.
> Also, the website <http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/libcf/>
> isn't very verbose. Is libCF available from any other location?
The most recent version, from April 2012, is still available from
The main development focus at the end had been implementing an API
for GRIDSPEC, in collaboration with a DOE-funded project, but that
library was never completed. There are currently better approaches
for conservative regridding in the ESMF regridding software:
and its Python interface in ESMPy.
The most recent active implementation of a library for the CF
Conventions is cf-python, at
Russ Rew UCAR Unidata Program
Ticket ID: MFY-950093
Department: Support netCDF
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Ross Gammon <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 01/24/2015 06:08 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 01/17/2015 01:02 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>>> libCF is still TODO
>>> ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=775584
>> I have basic packaging ready for libCF, but we should decide on the
>> source package name. Initially I used just 'libcf' too, but then opted
>> to change it to 'netcdf-libcf' because it's so closely related to
>> netcdf in general, and because libcf is split out from the netcdf package.
> I prefer netcdf-libcf, keeping the package names uniform. netcdf-python
> will be the next one (the scientific python source calls its python-netcdf).
>> Unfortunately there are only a couple of alpha and one beta release
>> published upstream, and it doesn't look very actively developed. So I
>> have my doubts about the usefulness of keeping libCF in Debian.
> Yes - the beta had the latest date, but it was a couple years ago. Maybe
> we should ask upstream? Packaging it and contacting them may gain it
> some traction.
>> One of the outstanding issues I have with the libCF packaging is that
>> it builds both libcf.so.1 and libcf_src.so.1 and the difference is not
>> clear to me. libcf in netcdf 4.1.3 only has a single version of the
> We can ask about this while we are at it.