Correct the search of interleaved files in the official tree

[FrancaCassol]

The present official tree path for DL1 files contains also the "short" code version: E.g.
/fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/[date]/v0.10

This was not considered in the interleaved search function, this PR correct the search.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 12 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (107f8ce) 74.22% compared to head (404c8a2) 74.23%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...pts/onsite/onsite_create_cat_B_calibration_file.py	14.28%	6 Missing ⚠️
...nsite_create_cat_B_calibration_files_with_batch.py	14.28%	6 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1192   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.22%   74.23%           
=======================================
  Files         130      130           
  Lines       13279    13273    -6     
=======================================
- Hits         9857     9853    -4     
+ Misses       3422     3420    -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[morcuended]

I left some comments

[morcuended]

Latest changes removing the version traitlet look fine to me.
My only concern is to add some tests to the Cat B calibration code if possible (to be done somewhere else)

[FrancaCassol]

Hi @morcuended, the tests of the code were added in other PRs, which type of tests do you mean? I can think to them for an other PR, this PR is just a bug correction.
@maxnoe could we merge this PR?

[maxnoe]

I can think to them for an other PR, this PR is just a bug correction.

The tests were passing before, the tests were unchanged and are still passing. Yet you say there was a bug. So the tests didn't cover the bug and we should add a new test that tests that it has been fixed correctly.

I.e. that test should fail before your code changes and pass after.

[morcuended]

Hi @morcuended, the tests of the code were added in other PRs, which type of tests do you mean? I can think to them for an other PR, this PR is just a bug correction.

Ah, ok, I see that the calib B tool is 86% covered. The onsite calib B script is 30% covered.

The change in this PR is not really a bugfix. It depends on the directory tree in the container. You could assume the same directory tree in the tests as well