more robust protection against infinite loops in Ecal multifit (74x)

[bendavid]

Main 74x branch version of #11368

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @bendavid (Josh Bendavid) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

more robust protection against infinite loops in Ecal multifit (74x)

It involves the following packages:

RecoLocalCalo/EcalRecAlgos

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@argiro 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.

[bendavid]

@cmsbuild please test

[davidlange6]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[bendavid]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #11369 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

[slava77]

code change looks ok

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 166c338
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11369/8215/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11369/8215/summary.html

[cvuosalo]

+1

For #11369 166c338

Another bug fix for an infinite loop in ECAL multifit.

The code changes are satisfactory, and Jenkins tests against baseline CMSSW_7_4_X_2015-09-18-1100 show no significant differences. I reproduced the bug in CMSSW_7_4_12_patch1 and confirmed that it is fixed by this PR.

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_7_6_X is complete. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1