MuonSegmentMatcher: add RPC hits, remove MuonServiceProxy dependence

[ptraczyk]

Added a method to MuonSegmentMatcher that performs matching of RPC hits. This is currently not used in standard RECO so no difference in reco output. Also removed the dependence on MuonServiceProxy. This resulted in a bunch of configuration files needing an update, which is also a part of this PR.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @ptraczyk (Piotr Traczyk) for CMSSW_7_6_X.

MuonSegmentMatcher: add RPC hits, remove MuonServiceProxy dependence

It involves the following packages:

DQMOffline/JetMET
HLTrigger/Configuration
HLTrigger/HLTanalyzers
RecoMET/METProducers
RecoMuon/MuonIdentification
RecoMuon/TrackingTools

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @fwyzard, @Martin-Grunewald, @deguio, @slava77, @danduggan can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio, @jdolen, @battibass, @ahinzmann, @abbiendi, @mmarionncern, @jhgoh, @Martin-Grunewald, @bellan, @nhanvtran, @bachtis, @jalimena, @schoef, @mariadalfonso, @trocino, @geoff-smith, @TaiSakuma, @rociovilar 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.

[perrotta]

-1

HLT configurations must be modified in ConfDB, and only after that dumped in the release.
Please add your new parameter in your modified modules using the ParameterSetDescription or, at worst, add it with an existAs() check, so that it does not comply if it is not included in the steering python configs. Then, once your pull request will be merged, the new configurations can be parsed in the HLT menu.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[slava77]

+1

for #10482 1240bf7

• code changes look ok (static analyzer is ok as well)
• jenkins tests pass and comparisons with the baseline show no differences as expected

[slava77]

DQM signature is needed here
@deguio could you please check.

[deguio]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1