TOTEM Timing detectors: DQM backports for 10_1_X

[forthommel]

backport of #22915
and also #23240

This PR backports the TOTEM timing detectors DQM features introduced in the 10_2_X development branch. It consists in the backports of the following PRs:

• Totem timing DQM #22915: core developments of the DQM
• CTPPS: DQM fix #23240: small fix + elastic/diagonal DQM developments

Based on #23352.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @forthommel (Laurent Forthomme) for CMSSW_10_1_X.

It involves the following packages:

CondFormats/CTPPSReadoutObjects
Configuration/StandardSequences
DQM/CTPPS
DQM/Integration
DataFormats/CTPPSDetId
DataFormats/CTPPSDigi
DataFormats/CTPPSReco
EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi
Geometry/VeryForwardData
RecoCTPPS/Configuration
RecoCTPPS/TotemRPLocal

@perrotta, @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @vazzolini, @kmaeshima, @davidlange6, @arunhep, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @dmitrijus, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @jfernan2, @cerminar, @slava77, @ggovi, @vanbesien, @fabiocos, @lpernie can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@batinkov, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @tocheng, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @rovere, @thomreis, @mmusich, @threus, @dgulhan, @seemasharmafnal this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Totem timing DQM #22915

[forthommel]

Not sure if you prefer a "lighter" backport PR only including the last ~10-15 commits related to the DQM, or if this format ("directly" mergeable after integration of #23352) is any better?

[dmitrijus]

This format is fine and I prefer it (if the commit history is shared, which, in this case, it is).

[perrotta]

+1

• This is the same as TOTEM Timing detectors: backports for 10_1_X #23352, plus a few DQM related commits: the additions here do not deal with reco, and therefore I sign this PR simply as a consequence of signing TOTEM Timing detectors: backports for 10_1_X #23352
• Both pull requests must be merged, because in TOTEM Timing detectors: backports for 10_1_X #23352 a new commit has been added which is not (yet) included here
• I verified that the two PRs do not conflict each other and they can be merged in any order without rebasing

[nminafra]

@perrotta if you want I can do the same commit as in #23352 so that only one merge is necessary

[perrotta]

I explicitely verified that they can be merged together without rebasing. Then I'd rather ask @fabiocos what he finds more convenient to speed up the integration of the whole set: I would say that it can be faster to collect all needed signatures and merge the two as they are now, but I am ready to re-sign if it is preferred. Nicola Minafra <notifications@github.com> ha scritto:

…

@perrotta if you want I can do the same commit as in #23352 so that only one merge is necessary -- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #23354 (comment)

[nminafra]

Thanks @perrotta, I'm ready to do it in case. I'll stand by for the moment.

[dmitrijus]

+1

[arunhep]

+1

[ggovi]

+1

[fabiocos]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_1_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_10_2_X is complete. This pull request will be automatically merged.