-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
Backport of inverse beta variable in pat::Muons for 10_6_X #29324
Backport of inverse beta variable in pat::Muons for 10_6_X #29324
Conversation
Some additional minor naming changes in the muon extra timer info reader
… Muon Extra Timer reader
A new Pull Request was created by @cericeci (Carlos Erice) for CMSSW_10_6_X. It involves the following packages: DataFormats/PatCandidates @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @santocch, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here
|
@cmsbuild please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
sure, please. Thank you. |
backport of #28212 |
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1 |
I reintroduced addInverseBeta back again, in fact I checked out the files back from the previous (rebased from master) commit. I was overzealous in removing the effects of the reminiAOD era modifier. |
@cmsbuild please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1
|
do you have comments @santocch? |
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_6_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_11_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @silviodonato, @dpiparo (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
This is a (long overdue) backport of #28212 to 10_6_X in order to save the inverse beta (timing variable) of pat::muons. We discussed this-very briefly- this in a reco meeting a couple of months ago. As it's been some time should I raise it again next time?
Our goal would be to have it as part of a possible UL re-miniAOD. Should I also comment on issue #27889 ?
PR validation:
Same tests as the original PR:
No compilation errors or of battery of tests from
runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Backport of #28212 to include the feature in reminiAOD of UL