add an option to add the NOSYS suffix to branches without systematics

This makes the n-tuple branches more consistent, and makes it very easy to determine the list of branches for nominal.

It also means that if we add (or drop) systematics from a branch, the names of the branches in nominal will not change. That doesn't happen all that often, but could still be helpful.

Leaving this disabled by default because it (obviously) changes the n-tuple content. Also we haven't yet decided whether this is even a good idea, but it ought to be a good enough idea to allow users to at least play with it.

This merge request affects 1 package:

• PhysicsAnalysis/Algorithms/AsgAnalysisAlgorithms

This merge request affects 1 file:

• PhysicsAnalysis/Algorithms/AsgAnalysisAlgorithms/python/OutputAnalysisConfig.py

Adding @krumnack ,@tadej as watchers

added Analysis CPAlgorithms analysis-review-required main review-pending-level-1 labels

CI Result SUCCESS (hash 434b93b2)

	Athena	AnalysisBase	AthAnalysis
externals
cmake
make
tests

Full details available on this CI monitor view. Check the JIRA CI status board for known problems
Athena: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AnalysisBase: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AthAnalysis: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
For experts only: Jenkins output [CI-MERGE-REQUEST-EL9 9167] (remote access info)

Some people find useful to not have NOSYS on "constant" branches to clearly state that they will not change, so this should stay configurable.

Hi Nils,

Just want to double check, although this is disabled by default. whould this be labeled as interface-change?

Best regards, Rui, AR shifter

MR looks fine from L1 perspective, CI shows no problems

Cheers, Qiyu, L1

removed review-pending-level-1 label

added review-approved label

added analysis-review-expert label

I don't think this needs further discussion or review, given that it is fairly minor and is an option that is off by default. Approving for AR.

@tadej This is mostly meant as an option to play with for people working on plotting frameworks who may find it easier to have the suffix on all branches. As such, I don't think we'll ever even make this a default, unless people come back and say that this is really better and clearer.

Cheers, Nils [Analysis RC]

added analysis-review-approved label and removed analysis-review-expert analysis-review-required labels

@ruyuan No, since it doesn't break existing code this does not need analysis-interface-change. Essentially that label is reserved in case we make a change that could break existing user code, both as a marker for further discussion about the cost-benefit tradeoff, and so users can easier find those changes and understand how (and why) they have to change their code.

merged

mentioned in commit b3731e6c