HBHE M3 = fix M3 (90)

[mariadalfonso]

backport of the #17983

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mariadalfonso for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

CalibCalorimetry/HcalAlgos

@ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18549/console Started: 2017/03/19 13:11

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 5635a9f
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17984/18549/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17984/18549/summary.html

[mariadalfonso]

@slava77 @fwyzard @deguio
it's important to have this PR in the 90X so that the siPM can be properly calibrated

[fwyzard]

sigh, this might be late for 9.0.0 ?

@mariadalfonso , does the change affect DIGI or HLT/RECO ?
In other words, if we run with a release that contains this PR (e.g. 9.1.x) over MC samples made with a release without this PR (e.g. 8.3.0) do we get the old or new results ?

[mariadalfonso]

@fwyzard
This PR doesn't change the DIGI and you need to check with @kpedro88 if that is ok for the HCAL-DIGI point of view.

Regarding the RECO/HLT
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/releases/tag/CMSSW_8_3_0
the 8.3.0 should not be use neither for the offline PF calibration neither for the online one
as it miss the M2 changes (#17533 #17311) and M3 changes (#17984 #17871)
of course is ok if you use the 9.1.x to re-HLT/re-RECO

[franzoni]

attn: @slava77

There's something inaccurate in the fact that this PR has alca signature - stemming from the fact that CalibCalorimetry/HcalAlgos holds both calibration related code and local reco / shape modelling classes.
@deguio @hatakeyamak would it be possible to factor our into reco or sim packages code which pertains there?

[slava77]

On 3/21/17 8:04 AM, Giovanni Franzoni wrote: attn: @slava77 <https://github.com/slava77> There's something inaccurate in the fact that this PR has alca signature - stemming from the fact that CalibCalorimetry/HcalAlgos holds both calibration related code and local reco / shape modelling classes. @deguio <https://github.com/deguio> @hatakeyamak <https://github.com/hatakeyamak> would it be possible to factor our into reco or sim packages code which pertains there?

Thank you for noting a stronger connection to reco. For these cases now you can issue "assign reconstruction"

…

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#17984 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbqDZ6-K0bVdT8QUz-QnwvoKiV7zYks5rn-bpgaJpZM4MhruY>.

[kpedro88]

@franzoni the problem is that many of these classes need to be used by both SIM and RECO. The guidelines for what packages should host such classes are not very clear.

[fwyzard]

+1

[fwyzard]

(signature for psychological support)

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #17984 was updated. @ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

[mariadalfonso]

fixed array based to the discussion in #17983

[davidlange6]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18608/console Started: 2017/03/21 20:48

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 309328f
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17984/18608/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17984/18608/summary.html

[slava77]

backport of #17983