Question: open for PRs for extensions of checkmate?

[danielinteractive]

Hi checkmate developers,

we are increasingly using checkmate for multiple packages and have been writing additional assertions etc. We are wondering whether you would be open for PRs with extensions of checkmate, or whether we should go for an add-on package (e.g. checkmate.extra or similar...). What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks,
cheers
Daniel

[tdeenes]

hi @danielinteractive , it is @mllg who is the right person to answer this question. Having said that, as someone who was an early adopter of checkmate (and made also minor contributions to it), I do not think it is worth extending checkmate further unless the given assertion is of really general use. In my experience, almost all custom assertions I create are somewhat specific to the particular problem I work on and therefore belongs to the given package.

Nevertheless, we could open a GitHub Discussion or an issue to collect the ideas for extensions. Everyone could add an entry to the list, and entries with many votes could be added to checkmate, or get included in a separate extension package. @mllg , your thoughts?

My candidate for a general-use assertion is assert_package, btw.

[mllg]

I basically agree with @tdeenes: if the assertion is of general use and helpful for a broad range of applications, then checkmate is the right place for the assertion. Maybe you could be more concrete what kind of assertions you would like to see in the package.

Open a discussion also sound like a good idea.

[danielinteractive]

Thank you @tdeenes and @mllg ! So we can come back with concrete proposals and then you can decide case by case.