Adding 2016 pre-VFP entries (v12)

[aalvesan]

Adding the campaign run2_2016_HIPM_uhh_v12. Includes all cmsdb entries for data, signal and background for 2016 nanoAOD datasets, at version 12, and for pre-VFP era.

[pkausw]

Hi @aalvesan , thanks for this massive amount of work! All in all, it looks in good shape 👍 I have some small requests:

• there are typos here and there in the different files. I did my best to check everything carefully, but can you also have another look?
• I think the imports in the different files point to the 2017 campaign, please correct this
• There seems to be an issue with datasets that are present twice. Might be connected to extenstions of datasets, which logically should belong to the dataset w/o the ext tag
• Can you also solve the linting errors on your branch?

I'm also tagging @dsavoiu here, because I know he also put some thought and work into the naming scheme of processes and datasets. Maybe he'll have additional comments

[riga]

This looks great @aalvesan 🎉
Could you add an entry to https://github.com/uhh-cms/cmsdb/blob/master/.github/workflows/lint_and_test.yaml#L61 so that the new campaign is covered by CI?

[dsavoiu]

Hi @aalvesan, thanks for adding this campaign! And thanks @pkausw for the ping ;)

I only noticed some minor things (naming conventions, typos), but maybe you could have a look and make changes where necessary?

Also, in general, I think it would be good to only use lowercase or "snake-case" for filenames in cmsdb, so instead of MultiBoson.py, could you use multi_boson.py or similar? Same for one-letter filenames (Z.py -> z.py, etc.)

Actually, I think in general in the other campaigns we collected the Drell-Yan, Multiboson, Z and W background samples in one electroweak file ewk.py. Unless we have a good reason for the separation, I would propose to rename or merge following files into one:

• DY.py, MultiBoson.py, W.py, Z.py -> ewk.py
• SingleHiggs.py -> higgs.py
• SingleTop.py -> st.py

[dsavoiu]

Hi @aalvesan, thanks for implementing the changes! Everything looks fine now, I just noticed a few minor things that should be easy to fix (see below).

[aalvesan]

Hi @aalvesan, thanks for implementing the changes! Everything looks fine now, I just noticed a few minor things that should be easy to fix (see below).

Hi Daniel, thanks again for the review! I think I just removed all .pyc files. Let me know if there is something else that needs to be fixed :)

Cheers,
Ana

[dsavoiu]

Hi @aalvesan, sorry for the delay in reviewing this. I actually noticed that I had overlooked some things in the initial review and also that the tests were failing due to some typos in the imports and missing processes. I took the liberty of committing a series of changes to fix these issues, so this should in principle now be ready to merge.

But @aalvesan please check if the changes work for you and I would also ping @riga and @pkausw here in case they also want to look over the changes before the merge.

[dsavoiu]

Hi @aalvesan, I fixed the conflicts with the master branch, which were due to the restructuring of unit tests introduced by #22. Did you manage to have a look at the latest changes? If there are no further things to do we could go ahead and merge this soon.

[riga]

LGTM!