CF-1.9 and CF-1.10 compliance check?

[rsignell-usgs]

@benjwadams any ETA of when CF-1.9 and CF-1.10 compliance will be available?
In particular, I'm looking forward to the new datatypes allowed in CF-1.9 (particularly int64)!

[benjwadams]

Hey Rich, there is a 1.9 branch currently. A lot of the development focus recently has been on correcting some of the deficiencies the checker had with respect to conformance docs. 1.9 is mostly done, but not rebased against the aforementioned fixes in master yet. One reason for the holdup is that we're having difficulty locating datasets that use lossy compression by coordinate subsampling (Section 8.3) in the wild for implementing that portion of the CF conventions. If you happen to know of any datasets that we could use as a reference, it'd be very useful.

[benjwadams]

We may also release a partial 1.9 checker if desired without the lossy compression until we can properly understand and implement that section.

[rsignell-usgs]

@benjwadams I think that's a great idea. As long as it's clear that lossy bit is
not being tested, the rest of the 1.9 checking will still provide important benefits for the community!

[benjwadams]

OK, we'll cut a release soon after some PRs have been merged and note the lack of the compression implementation in the README.

[benjwadams]

Closed with release of build support CF 1.9. CF 1.10 will be upcoming.