Integration of MVA/NoPU MET in central release

[mmarionncern]

This PR contains the MVA and NoPU code the JetMET group wants to make available centrally, and eventually computed at the RECO and miniAOD level after discussion with the RECO/AT group.

This PR add the package RecoMET/METPUSubtraction, and add the pat configuration files needed for the MET uncertainty tool.
Several fixes and cleaning are also done on the patCaloMET configuration, the pileupjetid configuration, the pileupJetid training needed by the MVA and NoPU MET.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmarionncern for CMSSW_7_2_X.

Integration of MVA/NoPU MET in central release

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/PatUtils
RecoJets/JetProducers
RecoMET/METPUSubtraction

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

RecoMET/METPUSubtraction

@nclopezo, @monttj, @cmsbuild, @StoyanStoynev, @slava77, @vadler, @ktf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@yslai, @TaiSakuma, @nhanvtran, @schoef this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.

[slava77]

@Degano @nclopezo
Alessandro or David, please create a repo for RecoJets-JetProducers with the current content that we have from the old external data distribution (data-RecoJets-JetProducers/V05-10-12) and put the two files in this PR on top.
Thank you.

[slava77]

I guess we will also need a cms-data repo for RecoMET/METPUSubtraction
@mmarionncern what are the prospects for this (root files) to become a payload in a database ?

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: e6b707d
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5188/830/summary.html

[mmarionncern]

Yes, it is on the to do list. I did not yet decided how I will implement it.

[vadler]

+1
Tested with CMSSW_7_2_X_2014-09-30-0200.
The remaining issues to be fixed in the future are #5388 (comment) (also present here) and #5188 (comment) .

[StoyanStoynev]

-1
It is not going to 72X at this point. This PR should be closed.
I'll be testing the 73X version (which is the same) - #5388 .

[mmarionncern]

@StoyanStoynev Is it now sure it will not go in 72X ? (just to avoid a reopening later)

[StoyanStoynev]

@mmarionncern There wasn't enough support for it at this last stage (technically - bug fixes only) - 720_pre7 is being build at this very moment. So no, this new feature will not go to 72X but directly to 73X.

[mmarionncern]

OK, no problem, thanks for the precision. I close this PR.