Modify genDst.C to allow use of FXT DB flavors

[genevb]

Very simple change.

[genevb]

@fgeurts and @plexoos :

It would be helpful to have this merged ASAP, and then tag SL24c (SL24c_0) which is identical to SL24b except for the addition of this single changed macro.

We can consider freezing an SL25a at some point soon with the GMT and FWD tracking changes, but I want to complete the recently started conversion production effort with what is essentially SL24b plus this macro change.

[plexoos]

I see what you’re asking for… but do you think it would make sense to just patch the SL24b branch with this commit and tag it as SL24b_1?

[genevb]

I see what you’re asking for… but do you think it would make sense to just patch the SL24b branch with this commit and tag it as SL24b_1?

The reason against this is that I used this macro for the P24y.SL24b conversion production that did not get btofFXT correct. I will need to reproduce that data, and for bookkeeping, it's best if we just make that P24y.SL24c.

[plexoos]

Okay, fine. In the case of the SL24b branch, I see that it didn’t really branch from the main branch (still at SL24b_0), and for this reason, SL24c would also branch directly from the main branch. I guess my concern is that, in general, we should avoid creating official branches off anything other than the main branch to prevent confusion with tags.

[genevb]

I'm fine with it not being an SL24c branch, just an SL24c tag....is that good?

[plexoos]

Creating a tag without a branch is possible but will likely be just as confusing as, for example, having an SL24c_0 tag on the SL24b branch :) could be puzzling for someone trying to figure this out in the future.

Anyway, in this particular case, I don’t see any issue with creating both SL24c and SL24c_0, which has now been done.