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
drop type specs in RecoLocalCalo and RecoLocalTracker #30147
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-30147/15931
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoLocalCalo/HGCalRecProducers @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @slava77 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 Tested at: f3dd2a1 CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-06-08-1100 I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: Build Python3
I found compilation warning when building: See details on the summary page.
I found errors: *** Error compiling 'src/RecoLocalTracker/SiStripRecHitConverter/python/StripCPEgeometric_cfi.py'... |
Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped) |
UncertaintyScaling = cms.double(1.42), | ||
MinimumUncertainty = cms.double(0.01) | ||
StripCPEgeometricESProducer = stripCPEESProducer.clone( | ||
ComponentName = 'StripCPEgeometric' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
commas are missing here...
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1
|
+upgrade |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @silviodonato, @dpiparo (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description: Update the safer syntax for existing parameter
(The reference was PR#29979)
Instead of modifying parameters with full type specs, which can be interpreted as an insertion of a new parameter, it is a safer way to protect from parameter name mistakes and will also help in possible parameter migrations.
PR validation:
Event Content comparison check was also done and there is no change with these updates.
Tested in CMSSW_11_2_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions.