perf: use a custom trie for path conflict validation

[letFunny]

• Have you signed the CLA?

---

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Note

Copilot was unable to run its full agentic suite in this review.

Introduces a trie-based conflict detector for slice path collisions and expands tests to cover more glob/double-glob conflict cases.

Changes:

• Replaced the O(n²) glob/generate conflict scan in Release.validate() with a pathConflictTree-based detector.
• Added extensive regression tests for glob conflicts and new focused unit tests for the conflict tree/segmenter.
• Exposed internal conflict-tree types/helpers to external tests via export_test.go.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
internal/setup/setup.go	Switches validation to the new conflict-tree implementation.
internal/setup/conflict.go	Adds trie-based conflict detection and path segmentation logic.
internal/setup/setup_test.go	Adds multiple new test cases for glob/double-glob conflicts.
internal/setup/conflict_test.go	Adds unit tests for pathToSegments and the conflict tree structure.
internal/setup/export_test.go	Exports internal symbols to support setup_test package tests.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

[letFunny]

After some very light work on performance to improve the algorithm without added complexity (basically caching some data to avoid map lookups, iteration order, etc. *) the performance is:

Benchmark 1: BASE
  Time (mean ± σ):     14.511 s ±  0.071 s    [User: 15.039 s, System: 0.079 s]
  Range (min … max):   14.411 s … 14.617 s    10 runs
 
Benchmark 2: HEAD
  Time (mean ± σ):     151.2 ms ±   3.1 ms    [User: 181.2 ms, System: 18.6 ms]
  Range (min … max):   143.9 ms … 155.8 ms    19 runs
 
Summary
  'HEAD' ran
   95.96 ± 2.00 times faster than 'BASE'

*: All verified to reduce the number of cache misses using perf which is why the time also improves reliably.

[upils]

Thanks @letFunny ! I am amazed at how faster this is. I even looked at the messages we display to the user to see if we could remove any as this is now pretty much instantaneous.

The overall approach looks very sane. I could not find corner cases not handled properly. I have suggestions and questions but nothing that would change the approach.
This is definitely more complex than the previous implementation but the massive performance gains justify it I think.

[upils]

This is repeating the implementation in plain English. Maybe it is not necessary.

[letFunny]

I think the code is a bit hard to read on its own that is why I included it. If you find the code is enough I will remove it, let me know.