-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
add verbose option to BeamSpotRcdPrinter
and use it in the unit tests
#43291
add verbose option to BeamSpotRcdPrinter
and use it in the unit tests
#43291
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-43291/37701
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master. It involves the following packages:
@saumyaphor4252, @francescobrivio, @cmsbuild, @perrotta, @consuegs can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild, please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-08d1ed/35855/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy, @antoniovilela (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
is there anything stopping integration of this? |
@mmusich there's a merge conflict now, can you fix? thanks. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-43291/37766
|
Pull request #43291 was updated. @francescobrivio, @perrotta, @saumyaphor4252, @consuegs can you please check and sign again. |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests RelVals RelVals-INPUT The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:
You can see more details here: Unit TestsI found 2 errors in the following unit tests: ---> test runtestRecoEgammaElectronIdentification had ERRORS ---> test testTauEmbeddingProducers had ERRORS RelVals
Expand to see more relval errors ...RelVals-INPUT
Expand to see more relval errors ...
|
please test |
@perrotta you might want to sign again irrespective of the failed test (due to the broken IB). Last push just resolved the merge conflict |
Indeed... |
The failing workflow are not identically the same as the ones failing in the IB. They certainly have the same origin, but let have a look at the new tests just launched first. |
There is absolutely no point in that, as the PR is not touching any code used in relvals. Why are you deliberately delaying the merge here (and many other PRs in the past)? |
Even if the release managers decide to keep integrating in spite of the storm of errors in the IBs after the last merging of 22 PRs all at once, I imagine that given their time zones none of them two will wake up before 11 am (CET) to integrate new ones in time for the 1100 IB. Since you relaunched the tests (unnecessarily, in my opinion) let them finish and have a look at their output, as I am curious to see whether the errors keeps appearing in different workflows as in the IB. (And please don't answer "the tests will finish even if you sign this PR now": I know it) |
that's a moot point. This PR is |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-08d1ed/35937/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will be automatically merged. |
PR description:
Title says it all, in response to #43265 (comment)
PR validation:
Run unit tests of the package
scram b runtests
If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
N/A