This is my branch to remove the redundant and awkward source package
+packaging page. This branch also as a drive-by fix for answers.

    lp:~sinzui/launchpad/remove-sp-packaging-bug-272343
    Diff size: 462
    Launchpad bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/272343
                   https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/491744
    Test command: ./bin/test -vv \
        -t "reg.*packaging"
        -t "answers.*question-overview"
    Pre-implementation: beuno
    Target release: 3.1.12


= Remove the redundant and awkward source package +packaging page =

Bug 272343 [Redundant "Upstream links" pages for each source package in each
    distribution series]
    Each series source package has a page that shows the package in other
    distributions. The page is irrelevant for the series, and each series
    has the same page. The page duplicates the information on the the
    project's +packages page, and overlaps the with distro source package
    +index page.

Bug 491744 [For: package link always rendered as "mozilla-firefox"]
    The hard-coded value in the template is always displayed. The tal:content
    instruction is missing.


== Rules ==

    * Remove the SP +packages URL, view, and template.
      * I do not think a redirect for the old URL is needed given how
        hidden and useless this page was.
    * Update stories to show where users really get this information.

    ADDENDUM
    * Add the missing tal:content instruction to the answers source package
      link.


== QA ==

    * Visit https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+packaging
    * Follow the link to 
    * Verify you are seeing +index
    * Verify the Upstream associations portlet explains the value of linking
      to upstream
    * Follow the set the upstream project in Launchpad link
    * Verify that you are seeing the edit page

    * Visit https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+packaging
    * Follow the link to 
    * Verify you are seeing +index
    * Follow the Show upstream links link.
    * Verify that you are seeing the project's +packages link.


== Lint ==

Linting changed files:
  lib/canonical/launchpad/pagetests/basics/notfound-traversals.txt
  lib/lp/answers/templates/question-portlet-details.pt
  lib/lp/registry/browser/configure.zcml
  lib/lp/registry/browser/sourcepackage.py
  lib/lp/registry/stories/packaging/xx-sourcepackage-packaging.txt
  lib/lp/registry/templates/distroseries-packaging.pt
  lib/lp/registry/templates/sourcepackage-index.pt



== Test ==

    * lib/canonical/launchpad/pagetests/basics/notfound-traversals.txt
      * Removed check for old URL
    * lib/lp/registry/stories/packaging/xx-sourcepackage-packaging.txt
      * Rewrote the entire test. This test was a prefect example of what a
        story is *not*. The story was impossible; it employed crafted
        links that the user had to read source code to accomplish his task.
        The new story shows how the user gets to the pages and explains why he
        is doing it.


== Implementation ==

    * lib/lp/answers/templates/question-portlet-details.pt
      * A drive by fix for bug 491744. I replaced the real info in the
        template with impossible values to verify the question tests broke.
        I added the missing tal:content link to fix the tests.
    * lib/lp/registry/browser/configure.zcml
      * Removed the URL.
    * lib/lp/registry/browser/sourcepackage.py
      * Removed the link and view.
    * lib/lp/registry/templates/distroseries-packaging.pt
      * Replaced the links the the SP +packaging to go to the SP +index per
        Martin.
      * Improved the spacing between the links per a suggestion by Martin.
    * lib/lp/registry/templates/sourcepackage-index.pt
      * Replaced the link to +packaging (added two release ago) to go to
        the upstream project's +packages page. I had to rearrange part of
        the template since the link is now dependent on the upstream link.
        * The link to the DSP that shows all distro packaging was added last
          release and is the preferred link for the Ubuntu community.
      * Added an explanation of why upstream links are important and a link
        to the edit page...yes, that is right, there was no link to the edit
        page to add the upstream link! Users had to locate the project or DSP
        to create the upstream link.