HOTFIXED [AGIPD][Correct]: Fix assumption that all modules follow quadrant convetion under 16 modules

Description

While Testing AGIPD HiZ, the correction failed because of the assumption we have of 16 modules and using the QM naming convention

http://max-exfl-cal001.desy.de:8008//gpfs/exfel/exp/HED/202431/p900478/usr/Reports/r0044/HED_TST_AGIPDHZ1_correct_900478_r0044_241107_104257_447047.pdf

For the sake of fast Hotfix I did this MR. However I want to sill go into this direction and even better reconsider the importance of QM convention. Otherwise we shrink its usage for the AGIPD1M detectors and maybe later with the AGIPD4M

THIS IS HOTFIXED!

How Has This Been Tested?

Tested the failed mentioned run and I will run now the CI for the rest of AGIPD detectors

Relevant Documents (optional)

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Checklist:

Reviewers

@jsztuk @schmidtp @kluyvert

changed milestone to %3.16.0

marked this merge request as ready

changed title from Fix assumption that all modules follow quadrant convetion under 16 modules to [AGIPD][Correct]: Fix assumption that all modules follow quadrant convetion under 16 modules

The test is failing but this is expected. As I have disabled AGIPD Minihalf HED to use QM convention as well. So this affected the stored metadata keys e.g. from Q1M1 to AGIPD00

added Test CAL Data Affected label

changed title from [AGIPD][Correct]: Fix assumption that all modules follow quadrant convetion under 16 modules to HOTFIXED [AGIPD][Correct]: Fix assumption that all modules follow quadrant convetion under 16 modules

Other than that, LGTM

(I cherry-picked commit 2e6bd597 to the deployment branch)

added 1 commit

• f81c720b - rfix: raise error if wrong key_name

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

Thank you for the review!

merged

mentioned in commit 9025148a

changed milestone to %3.15.3

changed milestone to %3.15.4