Mapping to new top-level project causes migration errors

[jyoung-slalom]

When mapping to a new top-level project, the mapping will execute properly and print as desired to the manifest file. However, when the application attempts to migrate items, it does not attempt to create the mapped top-level project if it does not already exist, which results in all objects within the mapped location failing to migrate.

Example:
Initial path: Test/Workbook
Mapping function inserts "Dev" as path_segment 0, resulting in path: Dev/Test/Workbook

Actual Result:
Because "Dev" does not exist yet, an error is triggered by the application:

ResourceManagerStringLocalizer searched for 'ContainerParentNotFound' in 'Tableau.Migration.Resources.SharedResources' with culture 'en-US'.

All content within the mapped location errors and does not migrate:

[16:03:46][INFO][main.py] 
            IWorkbook
                0/9 succeeded
                0/9 skipped
                9/9 errored
                0/9 cancelled
                0/9 pending

Expected result:
Application should attempt to create the new top-level project, similar to how it replicates an existing Tableau Server project structure on a blank Tableau Cloud site.

[pvshn]

TL;DR; This is a feature request we need to consider. The workaround is to create the Dev project - in your example - in advance.

Explanation:
Let's draw a parallel with creating a directory. When you create a directory with a command like mkdir parent/child/grandchild in linux, parent and child are also created. The permissions default to rwx and the directory tree is created.

Let's apply the same to a Tableau Project hierarchy. Now, it gets more interesting. When you map to a location like top-level-proj/child-proj/grand-child-proj (the path does not exist at the destination), the Migration SDK does not know what permissions to apply to proj and child-proj. There are questions like,

1. Should proj and child-proj have the same permissions as grand-child ?
2. Should proj and child-proj get permissions so that only the site admin creator (that the PAT belongs to) have edit type permissions ?
3. What permissions do others get ? Would those permissions violate the minimum-necessary-permissions principle ?

We need to consider all of these before we begin a feature development.