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 spec in RecoLocalTracker #32625
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32625/20680
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoLocalTracker/Phase2TrackerRecHits @perrotta, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @srimanob, @slava77, @jpata can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
phase2StripCPEGeometricESProducer.ComponentType = 'Phase2StripCPEGeometric' | ||
phase2StripCPEGeometricESProducer.parameters = cms.PSet() | ||
phase2StripCPEGeometricESProducer = phase2StripCPEESProducer.clone( | ||
#ComponentName = 'Phase2StripCPEGeometric', |
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.
Why do we need to keep ComponentName as a comment?
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.
In fact, there is not such a ComponentName
parameter in the phase2StripCPEESProducer
config: I think it is better if that commmented out line is simply removed
Please test |
@jeongeun |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8f70b7/12044/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32625/20714
|
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8f70b7/12258/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+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, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Update the safer syntax for existing parameter :
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.
(The previous PR for RecoLocalTracker is PR#30147. )
In this PR, a total of 2 files changed.
RecoLocalTracker/Phase2TrackerRecHits
RecoLocalTracker/SiStripZeroSuppression
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.