Drop egmGsfElectronIDs and egmPhotonIDs from RECO/AOD (74X)

[lgray]

backport of #10063

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Drop egmGsfElectronIDs and egmPhotonIDs from RECO/AOD (74X)

It involves the following packages:

RecoEgamma/Configuration

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Sam-Harper this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: a4cd43a
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10065/8547/summary.html

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:
bcd4881
You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10065/8547/git-log-recent-commits
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10065/8547/git-merge-result

[slava77]

+1

for #10065 a4cd43a

• changes in the code are as expected
• jenkins tests in the currently setup workflows show no differences
• reminder: the issue fixed in this PR appears in RECO+miniAOD runs where transient products from modules belonging only to miniAOD inadvertently end up in the RECO event content due to keep *_egmGsfElectronIDs_*_* that was there before. This was replaced by a drop statement (which is probably an overkill, but OK)

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1