-
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
Improve exception message from a ROOT read #36743
Conversation
No matter the exception type, make sure the branch name is known.
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36743/27846
|
A new Pull Request was created by @Dr15Jones (Chris Jones) for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @smuzaffar, @Dr15Jones, @makortel can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT RelVals-INPUT
Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (but tests are reportedly failing). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
@smuzaffar Would it make sense to produce comparisons even if RelVals-INPUT fail if the usual matrix workflows succeed? (I went through DQM bin-by-bin this time) |
@makortel , Relval-INPUT tests mostly fails due to network or eos issues ( which we either mostly ignore or just re-run the input tests). So I think it is fine to run comparisons even if Relval-INPUT tests failed. |
Yeah, nevermind, I see the comparisons were actually there and I yesterday I was looking from a wrong place in the test summary page. Sorry for the noise. |
ping @cms-sw/orp-l2 |
+1 |
merge |
PR description:
No matter the exception type, make sure the branch name is known.
PR validation:
Code compiles and framework unit tests pass.