-
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
Run4-hgx277 Adding a new scenario for October 18 TB setup #32925
Conversation
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32925/21155
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32925/21156
|
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master. It involves the following packages: Geometry/HGCalCommonData @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @makortel, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @srimanob, @kpedro88 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild Please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3396f2/12932/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Comparison tests seem to show many unexpected differences in Phase 2 workflows. |
@cmsbuild Please test |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32925/21163
|
Pull request #32925 was updated. @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @makortel, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @srimanob, @kpedro88 can you please check and sign again. |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3396f2/12940/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 |
+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:
Adding a new scenario for October 18 TB setup
PR validation:
Use cfg's in SimG4CMS/HGCalTestBeam/test
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Nothing special