[clas12_rgk] Selected RGK runs for calibration

[Raffaella De Vita]

Dear Latifa,
>From what I see, FTOF calibrations derived from 6b.1.1 apply very well to 6b.2.0, so I don’t think there is need to recalibrate FTOF. I think you can simply switch to cook with 6b.2.0 for the rest of the calibrations.
Best regards,
	Raffaella

> On 27 May 2019, at 22:27, Latifa Elouadrhiri <latifa at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear Raffaella,
> 
> For RGK we should proceed with 6b.2.0 in preparation for the near term milestones. Nikck please proceed with data processing of the selected RGK runs.
> 
> For the CLAS12 First experiment I have no feeling how much new calibration based  6b.2.0 will improve the physics? it will take us at least another week to converge on new calibration constants? should we just process the data processing based on the calibrations from last week? and what version of the release we should use?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Latifa
> 
> On 5/27/19 4:19 PM, Raffaella De Vita wrote:
>> Dear Latifa,
>> That will take a few days for testing and will require a new release. Therefore I would not recommend to wait for that to proceed with the calibrations.
>> Best regards,
>> 	Raffaella
>> 
>>> On 27 May 2019, at 22:16, Latifa Elouadrhiri <latifa at jlab.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Raffaella,
>>> 
>>> What do you think is need to test the vertex correction? I would like to wait for that to redo the calibration, if it is not too long?
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Latifa
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 5/27/19 4:06 PM, markov wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> Should we cook the full runs 5038/5036 with the new 6b.2.0 and distribute around for all the subsystems to calibrate?
>>>> Nick.
>>>>> On May 27, 2019, at 4:05 PM, Raffaella De Vita <devita at jlab.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> <20190527_vertex.pdf>
>