Transform RecoTrackRefSelector to stream::EDProducer

[makortel]

This PR changes RecoTrackRefSelector to a stream::EDProducer (using ObjectSelectorStreamProducer introduced in #9904). (for history, the PR first contained only a simple transformation to stream::EDFilter, but was then extended to contain the change to producer as there we re no use cases for event filtering)

Tested in 7_6_0_pre3, no changes expected in results.

@rovere @VinInn @fwyzard

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @makortel (Matti Kortelainen) for CMSSW_7_6_X.

Transform RecoTrackRefSelector to stream

It involves the following packages:

CommonTools/RecoAlgos

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ahinzmann, @jdolen, @rappoccio, @abbiendi, @jhgoh this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[makortel]

@fwyzard I guess you want this backported, both 74X and 75X?

[fwyzard]

Hi Matti, just 7.5.x for the time being. Thank you, .Andrea

[makortel]

@fwyzard OK, 75X backport is in #10912.

[fwyzard]

Hi Matti,
changing this from an EDFilter to an EDProducer is OK for the HLT, as we only use it as a producer anyway.
Fixing the HLT configuration via customizeHLTforCMSSW.py should be OK.

.A

[makortel]

Hi Andrea,
thanks for the confirmation. Would it be enough to change it as EDProducer in 76X (the supporting #9904 is in 76X only), or is it necessary to backport that change too to 75X? (I'd prefer the former, but latter is also doable)

Cheers,
Matti

[fwyzard]

For HLT I would prefer to make the change to a producer only in 76x, too.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #10911 was updated. @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77, @Martin-Grunewald, @fwyzard can you please check and sign again.

[makortel]

I included also the EDProducer transformation (so now its stream::EDProducer). If this is deemed ok, I'll update the PR title and description, and possibly squash the commits together.

[cmsbuild]

-1
Tested at: 2416da4
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
4.22 step1

DAS Error

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10911/7575/summary.html

[Martin-Grunewald]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 38d7906
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10911/7599/summary.html

[fwyzard]

+1

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #10911 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 53569f8
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10911/7834/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10911/7834/summary.html

[cvuosalo]

+1

For #10911 53569f8

This PR was already approved by Reco, but a merge conflict developed. It was rebased. Jenkins tests are still OK, except for workflow 50202.0 that encountered some error. A short test of 50202.0 with 15 events against baseline CMSSW_7_6_X_2015-09-02-1100 shows no significant differences, so the Jenkins error is not related to this PR.

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1