-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Run3-gex49 Correct the spellings in the scripts in CondTools/Geometry #32745
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32745/20897
|
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master. It involves the following packages: CondTools/Geometry @ggovi, @cmsbuild can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild Please test |
@cvuosalo Please check this |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32745/20899
|
@cmsbuild Please test |
@bsunanda The PR description says these scripts were tested with
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-535b11/12551/summary.html Comparison SummaryThe workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons Summary:
|
1 similar comment
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-535b11/12551/summary.html Comparison SummaryThe workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons Summary:
|
@bsunanda Search for "Perecent" in
You might want to drop |
@bsunanda |
+1 |
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) |
please test
I'm surprised to see so many changes in |
@silviodonato The scripts in this PR are not exercised by any PR test, so the PR comparison differences have nothing to do with this PR.
I don't think it is recommended practice to approve PRs with non-working scripts. At the very least, prominent "FIXME" comments should be added to the two scripts. |
please test |
@smuzaffar are the tests running? I see " cms/32745/slc7_amd64_gcc900/comparison Pending — Waiting for tests to start " |
@silviodonato , yes tests are running, jenkins is still under heavy load after yesterday's network issues. |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-535b11/12639/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+1 |
PR description:
Correct the spellings in the scripts in CondTools/Geometry
PR validation:
Tested using runTheMatrix test workflows
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Nothing special