Review swaps

[Jerry James]

When I iniatially submitted GAP and some of its packages as Fedora
packages, I followed what Debian was doing at the time.  I think we
can do a few things a little better now.  One way is to stop
translating the GAP package names into human readable form, and just
use the upstream names.  Rather than being convenient, those renames
are just confusing people.  Also, now that we have weak dependencies
in RPM, we can follow upstream's dependency chains a little more
closely.

The result is that I need to rename a handful of packages, and
introduce a few more.  In particular, I need reviews for the
following:

1. gap-pkg-atlasrep: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185014
2. gap-pkg-browse: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185015
3. gap-pkg-io: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185016
4. gap-pkg-polymaking: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185017
5. gap-pkg-sonata: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185018
6. gap-pkg-tomlib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185019
7. gap-pkg-ctbllib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185020
8. gap-pkg-spinsym: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185021

Reviews 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are rename reviews; 1, 4, and 8 are new
packages.  The first 5 packages can be reviewed without delay.  Review
6 (tomlib) depends on review 1 (atlasrep).  Review 7 (ctbllib) depends
on reviews 2 (browse) and 6 (tomlib).  Review 8 (spinsym) depends on
review 7 (ctbllib).

For the renamed packages, here are the original reviews for reference:
2. gap-pkg-browse: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869797
3. gap-pkg-io: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858287
5. gap-pkg-sonata: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858081
6. gap-pkg-tomlib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769450
7. gap-pkg-ctbllib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785903

The way this works upstream for noarch packages is that the package
tarballs are simply unpacked into the GAP package directory
(/usr/lib/gap/pkg in Fedora).  Hence, these spec files tend to do
something similar, with the exception that we try to remove a few
files that aren't actually needed at runtime.  Some surprising files
are needed at runtime, so I'm not as aggressive about this as some
reviewers may expect.  For example, the test code in a tst
subdirectory can be invoked from inside GAP, and GAP has its own
documentation viewer for the contents of doc subdirectories, so both
of those go into the main package.

Please let me know what I can review for you in exchange.  Thank you.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/