Introduce Track-Protocluster Associations

[ruse-traveler]

While we are able to generate and work with Link types with our current version PODIO (1-03), we are unable to use them in with our current version of JANA2 (2.4.2) due a small bug (see the JANA2 2.4.3 release notes).

However, since JANA2 2.4.3 includes breaking changes, it may be some time before we adopt it. This means that EICrecon#1699 is blocked until then since it requires functionality provided by edm4eic::TrackProtoclusterLink. And since this PR is part of the PF Alpha development program, it would be ideal to have some stopgap that allows development to continue.

A potential option could be to introduce an edm4eic::TrackProtoclusterMatch which parallels edm4eic::TrackProtoclusterLink

  edm4eic::TrackProtoClusterMatch:
    Description: "Match between a protocluster and a track"
    Author: "P. C. Matcher"
    Members:
      - float                 weight       // weight of this association
    OneToOneRelations:
      - edm4eic::ProtoCluster protoCluster // reference to the protocluster
      - edm4eic::Track        track        // reference to the track

The type would be functionally identical, but would be able to be used in JANA2 2.4.2. This will be straightforward to remove and swap in the Link type where needed when ready.

[wdconinc]

JANA2 should release a clean bugfix for 2.4.2. Ordinarily (in semver) that would be called 2.4.3, but maybe it can be called 2.4.2.1 if 2.4.3 is already released and backwards incompatible.

[ruse-traveler]

JANA2 should release a clean bugfix for 2.4.2. Ordinarily (in semver) that would be called 2.4.3, but maybe it can be called 2.4.2.1 if 2.4.3 is already released and backwards incompatible.

Oh! That definitely would be preferable! But would it be an issue to release the bugfix when the fix is already bundled in the 2.4.3 release?

[wdconinc]

JANA2 should release a clean bugfix for 2.4.2. Ordinarily (in semver) that would be called 2.4.3, but maybe it can be called 2.4.2.1 if 2.4.3 is already released and backwards incompatible.

Oh! That definitely would be preferable! But would it be an issue to release the bugfix when the fix is already bundled in the 2.4.3 release?

Not a technical issue, no.

[ruse-traveler]

Not a technical issue, no.

Gotcha! I'll swing by Nathan's office and float the idea to him! In the meantime, the association-version of the track-protocluster link was merged, so that's available as a workaround in the interim...