Add vtx smearing parameters from run 247324

[rmanzoni]

back port of
#9645

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @rmanzoni (Riccardo Manzoni) for CMSSW_7_1_X.

Add vtx smearing parameters from run 247324

It involves the following packages:

IOMC/EventVertexGenerators

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
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.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #9646 was updated. @cmsbuild, @civanch, @franzoni, @mdhildreth, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

[civanch]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cerminar]

@rmanzoni would it be possible to have also a set with the same position as in the 0T data but the other parameters as in NominalCollision2015 ? The idea discussed at the PPD coordination (with @mmusich @diguida @franzoni) is to provide some samples to the POGs to evaluate the possible misplacement of the luminous region without touching the widths.
Thanks,
G

[mmusich]

@cerminar we already agreed about this. We first need to assess if the Beamspot centroid position is stable enough in the data taken so far. I remind you that the numbers currently proposed just refer to the dN/dEta run

[davidlange6]

@rmanzoni - could you also make this PR consistent with the one that was agreed in 75x.

[rmanzoni]

@davidlange6 actually I am a bit confused because, after the discussion that went on for the 75X PR, that PR got merged before I could put the changes in place #9645
In fact this is what I see in the cutting edge 75X
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/CMSSW_7_5_X/Configuration/StandardSequences/python/VtxSmeared.py#L41
Just let me know how to proceed, I'm of course fine with the proposed changes.

[davidlange6]

@rmanzoni - ah - I made a mistake then.. please make the changes agreed with Salvatore there and put both in 75x and 71x..

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #9646 was updated. @cmsbuild, @civanch, @franzoni, @mdhildreth, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

[franzoni]

Hello,
@rmanzoni
can we please have the two agreed sim beamspot also added to 74? That's where the measurement of the reco beamspot will be carried out
(no need to use 71 gensim for that intermediate step)
Thanks!

[rmanzoni]

backport consistent with #9840 (originally #9645)

[rmanzoni]

@franzoni yessir! #9841

[franzoni]

Tks!