Change Details

This is a deposit that was validated by mistake on HAL (when I told them to hold off legacy software deposits) It arrived on the exact same day we had bugs on the deposit T1676. In the deposit database we have the metadata, but in the archive the metadata is missing and most importantly the author_date of the revision is wrong (not following the new process, where the dateCreated metadata is the author_date. Here is the revision in our archive: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/browse/revision/9bb7c6051f8d27c4108ec54f3d774fbe69ebd046/

This is a deposit that was validated by mistake on HAL (when I told them to hold off legacy software deposits) It arrived on the exact same day we had bugs on the deposit T1676. In the deposit database we have the metadata, but in the archive the metadata is missing and most importantly the author_date of the revision is wrong (not following the new process, where the dateCreated metadata is the author_date. Here is the revision in our archive: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/browse/revision/9bb7c6051f8d27c4108ec54f3d774fbe69ebd046/ It is noted high priority because the author is ready to deposit all Scilab versions and I prefer doing so after this is fixed.

This is a deposit that was validated by mistake on HAL (when I told them to hold off legacy software deposits) It arrived on the exact same day we had bugs on the deposit T1676. In the deposit database we have the metadata, but in the archive the metadata is missing and most importantly the author_date of the revision is wrong (not following the new process, where the dateCreated metadata is the author_date. Here is the revision in our archive: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/browse/revision/9bb7c6051f8d27c4108ec54f3d774fbe69ebd046/ It is noted high priority because the author is ready to deposit all Scilab versions and I prefer doing so after this is fixed.