Validate against NestedInstaller / Base Installer is not Archive

[Trenly]

• I have signed the Contributor License Agreement.
• This pull request is related to an issue.
  • Resolves Manifest validation succeeds when NestedInstaller(Type | Files) is used for non-zip packages #4633

Description:

This PR adds validation to ensure that NestedInstallerType and NestedInstallerFiles are not present for the installer if the base installer type is not an archive type. This will avoid confusion as the fields have no effect if the base installer type is not an archive.

---

Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

[yao-msft]

This change does not fix the original issue's related pr microsoft/winget-pkgs@5694bd8 (#162833). In that pr, the NestedInstaller* are defined at root. During default installer info population, the related entries are not copied to individual installers. So this change does not catch that pr's case.

When I was first implementing the ManifestValidation.cpp, I was thinking of only doing validations that are critical in the winget client's operations so it's a cheap operation. The nested installer files are mostly harmless in this case. I can see that we are starting to add non-critical validations like "schema header validation" based on community feedback, but they are behind fullValidation and as warning only. (Making it warning also prevents failures in wingetsvc index rebuild if some existing manifests already have inaccurate but harmless entries). So if we want to enforce this change, it would better be behind fullValidation and warning only too.

[Trenly]

Ah, thanks for catching the root case; Although, I am confused then - If the field's aren't parsed into each installer in parsing the Yaml into the Manifest object, then how does the validation to ensure that each installer has NestedInstallerType if that is at the root level?