Analogy fails on upgraded and pasted workflows

[rexissimus]

It seems analogies only work on "original" versions, that has not been upgraded or pasted. This is because the action chain between two versions (A and B) is used as the analogy. On upgraded and pasted workflows the modules are deleted and recreated and there is no way to tell which are the same.

I think we could fix this by computing the minimal action chain (as the workflow edit distance?) between A and B, applied that to A as C and use the diff between A and C as the analogy. We do not seem to have such an algorithm? But I know some people have been working on this.

[remram44]

Complexity is higher but a function of the number of modules, so this should be doable?

We don't preserve the identity of modules across upgrades (action is just "delete some modules and create some modules"), so I see no easy fix...

[dakoop]

Would it help to allow a mapping to be generated with the upgrade? To clarify, my understanding of the issue is: Given versions A and B and their respective upgrades A' and B', the path from A' -> B' is not useful in defining the changes between A' and B' because many of the changed modules are substituted on both ends. This may be another argument for version tree edits, but it seems like an understanding of how the modules are changed in an upgrade is important. Certainly, we could compute some actions between workflows but this eliminates the use of the actual provenance.