Use std::unique_ptr to manage memory in PileupJetIdProducer

[Dr15Jones]

While fixing a memory leak also switched from bare pointers to
using std::unique_ptr.

[Dr15Jones]

please test

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @Dr15Jones (Chris Jones) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoJets/JetProducers

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@TaiSakuma, @jdolen, @ahinzmann, @rappoccio, @yslai, @nhanvtran, @gkasieczka, @schoef, @mariadalfonso this is something you requested to watch as well.
@Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18304/console Started: 2017/03/09 20:54

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 98ac7fe
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17863/18304/summary.html

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:
d6d088f
You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17863/18304/git-log-recent-commits
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17863/18304/git-merge-result

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17863/18304/summary.html

There are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline:
25.0 step 5
The results for the comparisons for these workflows could be incomplete
This means most likely that the IB is having errors in the relvals.The error does NOT come from this pull request

[Dr15Jones]

ping

[slava77]

+1

for #17863 98ac7fe

• implemented as described
• jenkins tests pass and comparisons show no differences

[cmsbuild]

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 requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1