New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
PPS: rename directories with misleading names #29037
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-29037/13903
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jan-kaspar for master. It involves the following packages: CalibPPS/ESProducers The following packages do not have a category, yet: CondFormats/PPSObjects @andrius-k, @schneiml, @ianna, @fioriNTU, @tlampen, @pohsun, @santocch, @perrotta, @civanch, @makortel, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @Dr15Jones, @cvuosalo, @mdhildreth, @jfernan2, @tocheng, @slava77, @ggovi, @fabiocos, @kmaeshima, @christopheralanwest, @silviodonato, @franzoni can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Comparison Summary:
|
merge db: @ggovi |
+1 |
+geometry |
@jan-kaspar I reverted this PR with #29093 because it is causing many IB errors in CMSSW_11_1_X_2020-03-03-2300 (slc7 amd64 gcc820). @jan-kaspar please open a new PR, I think we need some help from @ggovi to fix the problem with CondFormatsCTPPSReadoutObjects |
It is supposedly an issue with root, see above |
OK, I am waiting for further advice. |
If you see the IBs, you'll notice the ROOT 620 IB which is also using the master branch of cmssw doesn't have the unit tests breaking and it's also the only one that is a full build (by chance, due to change relevant only to this specific build, this one cms-sw/cmsdist#5619 ). |
Thank you @mrodozov ! |
this would be easier (merge it again in cmssw) but I'd rather try to do it manually to confirm so that we don't mess it up further 😅 |
Thanks everyone! Is any action needed from our side? |
@mrodozov @silviodonato : was any attempt made to merge this again manually in the IB and make a full build, as suggested above? @silviodonato do you plan to eventually "revert the revert", or should we ask @jan-kaspar to prepare an identical PR to be merged after pre4? Please advise. |
Thanks @silviodonato ! |
+1 |
+1 |
PR description:
There were two instances of directories with misleading names in the (CT)PPS code tree:
We profit from this renaming, to replace CTPPS with PPS in the affected directory names.
In RecoPPS, we put all the local-reconstruction (within a single RP) into a single directory "Local".
This is a technical RP, no changes in the results are expected.
PR validation:
Running
gave
The plots below compare proton reconstruction with CMSSW_11_1_0_pre3 (blue) and this PR (red dashed) - there is no difference as expected.