Skip to content
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

Improve EDAlias implementation #25957

Open
makortel opened this issue Feb 15, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

Improve EDAlias implementation #25957

makortel opened this issue Feb 15, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

Development of #25907 revealed a couple of additional points in EDAliases that could be improved

  • One cannot chain EDAliases
    • On the other hand such a functionality is not necessarily needed, as one could just change the "last" EDAlias of the "chain"
    • Limitations are in Schedule::processEDAliases() and in Principal constructor that do not track dependencies of EDAliases
  • One cannot make an EDAlias for a SwitchProducer
    • Limitatation is in Principal constructor that does not allow (some) EDAliases to depend on (some) SwitchProducers
  • One cannot make an EDAlias for an EDProducer that register new products on a new-product-registration callback function, when another EDAlias triggers that function
    • Limitations are in Schedule::processEDAliases() and in Principal constructor that do not track dependencies of EDAliases

The list is likely not exhaustive.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Issue was created by @makortel Matti Kortelainen.

@davidlange6, @Dr15Jones, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos, @kpedro88 can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

One way to implement the dependence tracking would be to make EDAlias (output) BranchDescription registration to use the new-product-registration callback mechanism.

@Dr15Jones
Copy link
Contributor

assign core

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: core

@Dr15Jones,@smuzaffar you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants