Me0 global reco selectors

[dnash86]

This PR brings ME0Muon production in SLHC releases in line with what is in 76X (in PR #11398).

Note: The main difference in its current state between this PR for SLHC releases and what was sent for 76X is that the ME0MuonCollProducer is still in Validation/RecoMuon, not moved to CommonTools/RecoAlgos as we were requested to do for 76X. This package has been used by multiple analyzers in SLHC as is, but if need be I can make the same move to CommonTools/RecoAlgos as was done in 76X. Let me know.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @dnash86 for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

Me0 global reco selectors

It involves the following packages:

DataFormats/MuonReco
RecoMuon/MuonIdentification
Validation/RecoMuon

@cvuosalo, @slava77, @cmsbuild, @deguio, @danduggan, @vanbesien can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@battibass, @abbiendi, @jhgoh, @bellan, @trocino, @amagitte, @bachtis, @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' or '@cmsbuild, please test' in the first line of a comment.
@fratnikov, @mark-grimes you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[mark-grimes]

please test

Did you mean to put this on the 6_2_X_SLHC branch? I'll start testing, but this may have to go in on the SLHCDEV branch.

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9491/console

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: efc7db0
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12273/9491/summary.html

[dnash86]

@mark-grimes Ah, yes, this is probably more appropriate for the SLHCDEV branch. Should I re issue the PR there? (I guess I should send the PR to CMSSW_6_2_SLHCDEV_X, and not CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC, is that correct?)

[mark-grimes]

Yes, that's correct. You may or may not have to rebase, see if the changes are as you would expect when you try the SLHCDEV pull request.

[dnash86]

The comparison to SLHCDEV seemed identical to the comparisons to SLHC, so I sent the PR as is.