Krishnan Mahadevan

> @krmahadevan sure. But I don't see them. Did you finish the review? My bad. Forgot that. Now I finished it.

@juherr - Can you please fix the merge conflict ? We can merge this after that.

ping @juherr

@juherr - Do you think we should be supporting this ? If a user would like to access the `` from their suite xml file in their `@Test` methods which...

@juherr - We could support it, if there wasn't a way of getting it done. But that's not the case now. There is a proper way provided by TestNG to...

@korobochka - Thinking loud.. What if we enhanced TestNG such that, this can reside outside of TestNG and when plugged in, TestNG would basically just invoke the customisation ? That...

Following is what I see in TestNG `7.6.0` (latest released version as of today) ```java import org.testng.annotations.DataProvider; import org.testng.annotations.Test; public class TestClass { @Test(dataProvider = "dp") public void testMethod(int a,...

@vlsi - Am cross posting some of my observations from the github comment https://github.com/cbeust/testng/issues/2597#issuecomment-860071598 I dont think we have any of that convention yet in the codebase. Basically there are...

@vlsi > CHANGES.txt does indeed induce merge conflicts, however, they are alleviated to a degree by merge=union attribute Please see this PR. https://github.com/cbeust/testng/pull/2594 It shows that there are merge conflicts...

> How about ignoring a subpackage like **/testdata/**/*.class and/or *TestData*.class? This would like I said need some sort of re-org with the tests because there's no fixed pattern of package...