Bibtex parser - Found unbracketed comment

[Siedlerchr]

1. Create a new db with this entry
2. Save, bibtex parser complains about ubracketed comment

As far as I remember and according to this information here, it should be valid:
http://maverick.inria.fr/~Xavier.Decoret/resources/xdkbibtex/bibtex_summary.html
@lenhard @koppor As you have some deeper insight into the bibtex "standard", do you know if JabRef behaves here correct?

@COMMENT { BibTex package created by Trove, National Library of Australia https://trove.nla.gov.au }

@Book{Artillery1914a,
  author        = {Australia. Army. Royal Field Artillery},
  title         = {Standing orders of the Royal Australian Field Artillery : 1914},
  year          = {1914},
  language      = {English},
  note          = {State Library of NSW. M 358.21/A},
  publisher     = {Melbourne : Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer},
  catalogue-url = { https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/21191657 },
  subjects      = { Australia. Army. Royal Field Artillery; Australia. Army -- Regulations },
  timestamp     = {2018-04-15},
  type          = {Book; Book/Illustrated},
}

[koppor]

The entry has TWO things inside. This is currently unsupported at JabRef.

JabRef kind of accepts pasting that string as a whole in the entry table, but drops the @COMMENT.

Two options:

A) Accept that this comment is dropped
B) Enhance JabRef to handle @COMMENT properly, too.

We store the comments to an entry at the data structure, but IMHO do not show it.

We renamed the "Review" field to "Comments" (@LinusDietz at #3658), which might get confusing now.

Not sure whether we should migrate comments above an entry into the entry itself. I don't think so. We should nevertheless offer a field in the entry editor showing "Annotations", which means the comments above the entry.

I think, this refs #391.

[Siedlerchr]

I would vote for option A. When I copy and entry it should be copied complete, event with uncommented stuff. But I personally never used that feature. That entry was from the data in #3946