I think grayskull is your answer.
Yes, it should probably be better advertised.
The other helpful resource is the template in:
While I agree that better docs are in order, a couple points:
1) conda has an inherently higher (potential) level of complexity, as it supports various non-Python packages: C libs, compiled python extensions, etc.
That being said: the easy stuff should be easy.
2) creating “pip packages” ( I put that in quotes, because in a sense there is no such thing — I guess wheels are the closest) is actually not that easy — the tools have been changing, there are multiple options, there are a lot of out-of-date docs and examples, and building C extensions is a real challenge.
Other than better advertising of grayskull, the other thing I’d like to see are a few different example templates for conda-forge packages: one for pure Python, one for a simple C extension, etc….
But you can go find a recipe for an existing package if you know where to look.
Final note: making a conda-forge compatible package is a bit more complicated than a build it-yourself package. That’s because it needs to work with the CI infrastructure, and it’s a “curated“ system. But the extra up front costs are well worth it if you want to make your package available to the community.
-CHB