Arch Linux User Repository

Giniu, thank you for your comments. I no longer use this library, so I do not know how this specialized area is evolving, and I am not able to test the package. I am willing to continue to maintain this package, relying on user comments such as yours. I am also willing to orphan this package, if you have the time and interest to volunteer to become maintainer. Please feel free to tell me your preference. I think this package should be renamed to reflect its status as a python library, not an application, according to https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Python_Package_Guidelines We could use python-pyhdf for now, and if/when the upstream goes to python3, change python-pyhdf to 3 and add python2-pyhdf. Alternatively, we could begin with python2-pyhdf. My understanding of the keep-it-simple philosophy is not to specify python2-pyhdf unless there is, or will soon be, a python-pyhdf as well. I suppose opinions may vary on this point. It appears to me that the python-netcdf4 maintainer has not changed to python2-netcdf4. I also wonder whether we should support both with and without netcdf. Following the hdf4-nonetcdf example, should we have both python-pyhdf and python-pyhdf-nonetcdf? This seems more consistent than having python-pyhdf and python-pyhdf-netcdf. However, I don't know whether there would be any users for the version with netcdf, given the conflicts you describe. Creating packages that no one wants is not keep-it-simple, either. I look forward to reading your reply on these issues.

Hi. Can you please update this package to python2? Also, if you replace hdf4 dependency with hdf4-nonetcdf ( https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37456 ) this package will no longer conflict with netcdf (and thus with gdal, python2-netcdf4 and more).