Cleanup GFlash and PhysicsLists sub-libraries

[civanch]

Obsolete unused classes have been removed from GFlash subdirectory.

Few classes were cleaned up. Unnecessary Geant4 disclaimers are removed.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @civanch (Vladimir Ivantchenko) for CMSSW_8_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

SimG4Core/GFlash
SimG4Core/PhysicsLists

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @Degano, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

Following commands in first line of a comment are recognized

• +1|approve[d]|sign[ed]: L1/L2's to approve it
• -1|reject[ed]: L1/L2's to reject it
• assign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to request signatures from other categories
• unassign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to remove signatures from other categories
• hold: L1/all L2's/release manager to mark it as on hold
• unhold: L1/user who put this PR on hold
• merge: L1/release managers to merge this request
• [@cmsbuild,] please test: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests
• [@cmsbuild,] please test with cms-sw/cmsdist#<PR>: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests using externals from cmsdist

[civanch]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10486/console

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 3d4aa3b
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12933/10486/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12933/10486/summary.html

[civanch]

+1
this PR is trivial

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

@civanch - in terms of removing the g4 license. what is your estimate of code overlap with the original UrbanMscMode93? It seems quite high to me.

[civanch]

The model itself was not fully stable and was changed a bit from release to release. In Geant4 used in 8_0_X Urban93 model does not exist any more. It was one of the main reasons to copy the model to CMSSW. By the way, I have full agreement with Laszlo Urban about authorship statement within CMSSW version of the code.

[davidlange6]

@civanch - maybe you can forward me some more information and add a note in the code? [I'm not sure the authors permission is sufficient in this case, but at least we will remember the process we went through if asked in a few years]

[civanch]

@davidlange6 , I have prepared an extended comment to the header of the class. If you will be satisfied by it will be committed. Please, have a look below:

//
// GEANT4 Class header file
//
//
// File name: UrbanMscModel93
//
// Original author: Laszlo Urban,
//
// V.Ivanchenko have copied from G4UrbanMscModel93 class
// of Geant4 global tag geant4-09-06-ref-07
// and have adopted to CMSSW
//
// Creation date: 21.08.2013
//
// Class Description:
//
// Implementation of the model of multiple scattering based on
// H.W.Lewis Phys Rev 78 (1950) 526
// L.Urban CERN-OPEN-2006-077, Dec. 2006
// V.N.Ivanchenko et al., J.Phys: Conf. Ser. 219 (2010) 032045

// -------------------------------------------------------------------
// In its present form the model can be used for simulation
// of the e-/e+, muon and charged hadron multiple scattering
//
// This code was copied from Geant4 at the moment when it was removed
// from Geant4 completly (together with G4UrbanMscModel91, 95, 96).
// Since that time Geant4 supports the unique class G4UrbanMscModel.
// It was shown in Geant4 internal validations that this last class
// provides more accurate simulation for various thin target tests.
// However, it is not guranteed stable results for calorimeters run1 versus run2.
// CMS private version of the Urban model has the same performance as
// the model used for run1 but includes several technical fixed introduced
// after run1 (mainly to avoid numerical problems for very small steps).

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10536/console

[cmsbuild]

-1
Tested at: 8f31726
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
1001.0 step1

DAS Error

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12933/10536/summary.html

[civanch]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10543/console

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 8f31726
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12933/10543/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12933/10543/summary.html

[civanch]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1