IBX-6631: Enriched TrashItem with removedLocationContentIdMap

[barw4]

Question	Answer
JIRA issue	IBX-6631
Type	improvement
Target Ibexa version	v3.3
BC breaks	no

Related PR: https://github.com/ezsystems/date-based-publisher/pull/267

One assert was removed because crucial values are compared in the same method which makes this assert obsolete. Obviously, it also fails as loaded TrashItem will always have an empty removedLocationContentIdMap whether the one built after trashing - won't.

Checklist:

• Provided PR description.
• Tested the solution manually.
• Provided automated test coverage.
• Checked that target branch is set correctly (master for features, the oldest supported for bugs).
• Ran PHP CS Fixer for new PHP code (use $ composer fix-cs).
• Asked for a review (ping @ezsystems/engineering-team).

[alongosz]

@barw4 this is very good, but as usual, I need some integration test coverage to see that those subtree IDs land there properly in that API TrashItem Value ;)

[barw4]

@alongosz test added in 48730c1

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

[Steveb-p]

In https://github.com/ezsystems/date-based-publisher/pull/267 I see that you are using this map to create content deletion notifications, and perform actual deletions.

Note that Content can have multiple locations, which means the same Content ID might occur in this map multiple times. Is this your intent?

[barw4]

@Steveb-p Yes, it can appear multiple times. Why would that be a problem? If one schedule entry is deleted, the second one won't be found and hence, won't be deleted. No exception is being thrown.

[Steveb-p]

If that is the case, then it is ok. I assumed it was a case that was not taken into account and the same action was taken for the same Content ID more than once.

You may consider swapping the map order. By having it be array<ContentID, array<LocationID>> (array with ContentID as keys and an array of LocationIDs as value) you would have a similar effect, with Location IDs being grouped together. Only a suggestion though, of course.

[tomaszszopinski]

QA approved on IbexaDXP 3.3 commerce.