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
Run3-gex90X Clean up a few cfi's for HCAL and SimDB geometry #35115
Conversation
@cmsbuild Please test |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35115/25006
|
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master. It involves the following packages:
@civanch, @Dr15Jones, @makortel, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d4d267/18229/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+Upgrade Technical PR to clean up the configuration. |
from Geometry.MuonNumbering.muonGeometryConstants_cff import * | ||
from Geometry.MuonNumbering.muonOffsetESProducer_cff import * |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is the muonOffsetESProducer_cff
being added? The DDD workflows ran successfully without it, so why is it needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is strictly not needed - I just wanted to symmetrize between ddd and dd4hep parts. It also does not cause harm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please add a comment to the file saying that muonOffsetESProducer_cff
is not needed but is included for consistency with the DD4hep version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added
@cmsbuild Please test |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35115/25046
|
Pull request #35115 was updated. @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @makortel, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob can you please check and sign again. |
+1 |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d4d267/18269/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Clean up a few cfi's for HCAL and SimDB geometry
PR validation:
Use the runTheMatrix test workflow
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Nothing special