Fix forgotten substitutions in the RandomNumbersSvc rework

As I don't have Pythia8 installed on my dev machines, I missed some substitutions while reworking uses of RandomNumbersSvc in the context of !49 (merged). A build breakage for the FatrasExamples and ReadEvgenExample ensued. This merge request should resolve the problem.

changed title from Fixed forgotten replacements in the RandomNumbersSvc rework to Fix forgotten substitutions in the RandomNumbersSvc rework

changed the description

@hgraslan The acts repository path for the submodule uses an url relative to location of the framework repository, i.e. when your framework repository is at

<your_user_projects/acts-test-fw

it uses this path

<your_user_projects/a-common-tracking-software

to fetch the acts repository. I suspect that your repository is either at a different url or is not up-to-date with respect to the official repository.

I see. Thanks for the clarification! Indeed, my fork's master branch was not up to date, as I did not usually need to update it. Fixed this and restarted the pipeline, now it works and the branch looks ready to merge.

I guess there is an underlying philosophical question here, which you started discussing at the last meeting: do we want to test the framework's against the "real" ACTS master branch or against a user-provided version of ACTS?

Some arguments for the former:

• One cannot accidentally break the test framework, in spite of apparently passing CI, by misleading CI into relying on a private ACTS branch.
• Maintenance is simpler, one does not need to update the submodule every time ACTS is updated.

Some arguments for the latter:

• Joint core library + test framework interface upgrades are much easier to perform.
• One does not need to wait for an ACTS MR to be merged before proposing changes to the framework, although those changes should only be accepted after ACTS has been updated.

Yes, its a non-technical question. Since this is a test framework I would give ease of use for our purposed a higher priority than in a general production framework. To test ACTS itself we already have the unit tests which must always be in sync. That is why I favor the latter arguments.

In any case, this is ready to merge also from my side.

approved this merge request

@rlangenb Did you manage to get access rights to merge this?

I sent an email to @asalzbur, I'm waiting for him to get back to me, or he can for now just merge this request

@msmks @rlangenb - I have changed the permission overriding the LDAP permissions, not sure whether it is immediately in affect. Let me know if it works, both of you should be acts masters now.

Thanks, I received the email that I now have master access, but I still can not merge the request.

merged

mentioned in commit e694a84f

@asalzbur Same as @msmk. I seem to have much more rights in acts with the account @rlangenb, the same rights as with the Jenkins account. I was able to merge this request with the @atsjenkins account, which also is Master for this project and seems to have the same rights for acts-sw and acts-fw.

This is weird, I am not really sure why this difference should exist.

Ah I just realized, next to these comments my status is noted as "developer". As is Moritz' status. When looking at the "Settings" of acts-fw under "members", I see myself as "master". Could you try removing me and re-adding me to acts-fw?

Hi @rlangenb, the membership is synchronised with the LDAP setting, probably it just needs to resynch ?

Looks like you were right, Moritz and I now do have master access. Thanks!