Fix the duplicated root issue.

[koukarine]

Remove the redundant project dependency, triggering the "Duplicate content roots" automatic deletion action for the generated commonMain/resources folder.

Fixes #829

• Tested rebuilding project clean, cofirmed no warning.
• Ran the testapp to confirm no visible issues.
• Unit tests passing OK locally.

[kdeus]

I tried the same fix back in #767, and it ended up breaking the build, even though tests passed locally (see https://github.com/openwallet-foundation-labs/identity-credential/actions/runs/11620001708/job/32360863428?pr=767). It looks like this PR made it past that step.

Any idea why it would build successfully now but wasn't back in October/November? Is there a risk that the build would become flaky with this change?

[koukarine]

Any idea why it would build successfully now but wasn't back in October/November? Is there a risk that the build would become flaky with this change?

It could be explained by a positive change in the project structure, or improvements in the content generating algorithm. The flakiness is usually created by ignoring that error and caused by different paths of possible code building (ambiguity). In this case it should be consistently failing due to the missing resource. We can keep an eye on that for now and if resurfaced or exhibit flakiness then revert it again.

Looking through your past build log.

[koukarine]

@kdeus. In your past PR logs I see some other warnings about missing files for the project (at the very beginning). These XML files might be required to generate the resources folder content in question. In case they are failed to build they will be absent in the target resources folder and then fail the samples:testapp build job. Not sure why that happened back then, but there are no such warnings in the latest build anymore. So my idea that the project structure or the generation script robustness were improved recently seem to be plausible. I need more time digging the code to catch and meet all ends involved. I'll keep an eye on that while studying the code further.

[kdeus]

Yeah, looks like some random flakiness in the old build. I'm not sure what we've changed that would have addressed that, but in any case, it looks like this is the right fix and I just got unlucky. This LGTM. I'll approve.

And I'll leave this unmerged for now, in case you want to do some more investigation. Or feel free to merge whenever.