[subexp-daq] Question on UCESB

[Håkan T Johansson]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024, Weber, Guenter Dr. wrote:

> 
> Dear friends,
> 
> 
> we now had a brief look into UCESB and UPEXPS.
> 
> 
> Is our intepretation correct, that *.spec-Files are used for mapping between
> the raw data within an LMD event and "interpreted" data that is then used
> for further analysis?

Yes.  The .spec files contain the data format descriptions, and also the 
mappings of channel names (in the SIGNAL statements).

> If true, why is the folder SPEC containing only spec
> files for a few of the modules available in NURDLIB?

The ucesb/spec/ directory comntain files where I or users have sent me 
patches/commits with those data format specifications.

> Is it just the case
> that nobody found time yet or is there a design decision behind this?

If users place / keep them elsewhere (like e.g. upexps) longterm, there is 
not much I can do...  :-)

Not a design decision.  Except that the stuff in (the generic spec/ 
directory) should not be experiment specific.

> We are
> now ondering what is the best wyo add a spec file for the new module that we
> added to NURDLIB.

Sure!  Yes, please!

> Also, if this made sense, we could add a spec file for the
> STRUCK digitizers whcih currently does only exist within UPEXPS.

Yes.  But we also need to know where it came from, since ucesb is 
publically available, and just for good form want to keep the license in 
order.  I do want to make a mess like this, but to avoid issues down the 
road.

> To us there it is not really clear where UCESB ends and UPEXPS begins. Could
> you explain what exactly is the purpose of both packages? What is UPEXPS
> doing that could/should not be a part of UCESB?

Generally, ucesb/ is (expect for the fast that it has some (old) example 
and test directories, not experiment-specific.

upexps (or any other user repo) would contain the signal mappings for 
sure.

Some .spec files would likely be better to have somewhere under 
ucesb/spec/

Cheers,
Håkan