Use CALIB_PROD_ID instead of pro to search for calibration files

[marialainez]

Otherwise, when trying to reprocess dates with a different version the new calibration files are not produced since the calibration files are found in the "pro" directory, and the reprocessing gives an error.

[morcuended]

@marialainez please have a look at the changes. It would be good to test it in the container also

• Removed the calib_prod_id which is indeed simply the lstchain version according to the default usage of the onsite calibration scripts in lstchain
• Removed all the functions related to this parameter
• Removed the parameter from config.options and the cfg
• Adapted the tests to use this new calibration version
• Adapted the provenance code to also use properly the calibration version
• Other minor cleanup and refactoring

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 11 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b8b0c67) 81.54% compared to head (04e9548) 81.59%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #239      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.54%   81.59%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          57       57              
  Lines        4789     4814      +25     
==========================================
+ Hits         3905     3928      +23     
- Misses        884      886       +2     

Files	Coverage Δ
src/osa/configs/options.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/osa/conftest.py	92.88% <100.00%> (+0.20%)	⬆️
src/osa/provenance/utils.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/osa/scripts/calibration_pipeline.py	72.72% <100.00%> (ø)
src/osa/scripts/tests/test_osa_scripts.py	89.72% <100.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
src/osa/tests/test_paths.py	100.00% <100.00%> (+3.44%)	⬆️
src/osa/utils/cliopts.py	94.25% <ø> (+0.46%)	⬆️
src/osa/utils/tests/test_utils.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/osa/utils/utils.py	86.06% <ø> (+0.45%)	⬆️
src/osa/paths.py	91.36% <97.56%> (+2.20%)	⬆️
... and 1 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[morcuended]

It seems there is a problem with DL1 datacheck stage of the datasequence: dl1 datacheck files are not produced.

[marialainez]

I tested this branch in the IT container and it works as expected. Also, the DL1 datacheck files were produced without problems for the nights I tested.

[morcuended]

I tested this branch in the IT container and it works as expected. Also, the DL1 datacheck files were produced without problems for the nights I tested.

oh, really?! For me, the last stage (lstchain_dl1_check) was strangely running forever in the nodes. It was not producing the dl1_datacheck files. However, I ran exactly the same command issued manually and it worked fine. I could not find any apparent reason. If it works for you, I propose to resolve the current conflicts and merge it. Give it another try with main branch