Re: VMC open issues

Hallo Andrei and all,

Thanks for this attempt, I have a few points which we could discuss:

1. Assemblies:

In Geant4 they have no Id but in ROOT they have, this has consequences to the geometry tree, i.e: If one try to relay on the mother-daughter relation the code will differ between the different navigations (ROOT and G4Native) is it possible to have a unified concept? Why do they have an Id in ROOT? Sometimes they are even seen in the simulation, something which should never happened.

2. In TGeant3.cxx there is many particles and decay modes that are hard coded there! If one try to define his own particles and decay modes it could conflict, and I already runs into problems and get very strange results before finding out that some things are hard coded.

3. Cerenkov total reflection:

it is not working properly with GeoManager, when comparing with G4Native, it is working as expected (the same geometry is converted to Native G4 via VGM)

4. Geane-VMC:

Eustep.F has to be re-written in C++ to have more control on the stepping behavior of Geane  

So I hope this would be a start for the discussion!

Best regards

Mohammad

On 22.08.2008 10:42 Uhr, "Andrei Gheata" <Andrei.Gheata_at_cern.ch> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> This is a (late) attempt to keep our promise made on ALICE-FAIR meeting
> in April to follow-up in regular meetings (video-conferencing at least)
> the remaining VMC-related open issues. The idea would be to gather from
> you a list of items to be discussed/clarified/fixed or implemented in
> the VMC framework, items that will go on the agenda and followed-up on
> each meeting. Meetings would be held mostly at CERN (so that people
> present there can physically attend) and using EVO system for the
> others. I would be glad to take the task of organizing this if the idea
> is OK with you.
>
> In order to start-up faster and realize what would be the agenda and
> frequency of these meetings, it would be good to send me your input as
> soon as possible. Your suggestions and ideas on how to go for this in a
> profitable way will be appreciated. We have all to realize that if we
> want the process to give some benefits we need some commitment from both
> developers and users.
>
> Please let me know. Best,
> Andrei
>

--