Skip to content

[WIP] Remove the legacy podio I/O components and services#392

Draft
tmadlener wants to merge 18 commits intokey4hep:mainfrom
tmadlener:rm-podio-datasvc
Draft

[WIP] Remove the legacy podio I/O components and services#392
tmadlener wants to merge 18 commits intokey4hep:mainfrom
tmadlener:rm-podio-datasvc

Conversation

@tmadlener
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@tmadlener tmadlener commented Apr 2, 2026

BEGINRELEASENOTES

  • Remove the legacy podio I/O components and services (PodioDataSvc, k4DataSvc, FCCDataSvc, PodioInput, PodioOutput and MetaDataHandle). These have been marked as deprecated before.
  • Switch all existing tests over to use IOSvc and EventDataSvc based I/O and TES instead
  • Remove a few test cases which explicitly covered k4DataSvc functionality only and for which we have an equivalent test already for IOSvc

ENDRELEASENOTES

@tmadlener
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I can build a local stack with these changes and all the linked PRs.

@jmcarcell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I have pushed a few commits removing references and old files.

@jmcarcell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Some tests could not be needed anymore because what they do now is also done in other tests. TwoProducers.py simple has two algorithms producing, but we have other tests doing that too.

@tmadlener
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

For the tests I have removed a few but I have not done a really comprehensive survey of which ones are also covered somewhere else. Should we do this in this PR or do we do another one? I am happy to do either.

@jmcarcell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I think it can be done here since there can't be that many; the candidates are the ones that are modified to use IOSvc. I had a look yesterday and only TwoProducers.py was clearly redundant. Maybe also https://github.com/key4hep/k4FWCore/blob/main/test/k4FWCoreTest/CMakeLists.txt#L133 but the other versions of CheckExampleEventData do other things.

@tmadlener
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I will have another look and update this PR accordingly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants