Handling sub-components of the root component the same as all other components

[malice00]

After adding the option to resolve Gradle modules from NPM packages and adding the new SBOM in Dependency-Track, I noticed the components didn't have licenses set. Checking the actual packages if they actually have licenses configured, I found that the licenses were removed on sub-components of the root component.

This PR fixes this issue and uses the same method(s) to convert the 'temporary' objects to their correct SBOM counterparts.

I just noticed this removes all code that fixed #479, but all tests are still running and my projects also work like before... If anybody has some Gradle projects they could run through it before we merge, that would be great!

[prabhu]

@malice00 Could you create a test case for the problem you are facing? Maybe there is a better fix. The particular code you have changed could create more problems in the field, since it has quite a few hacks.

[malice00]

Maybe I could leave the fix in... The issue I am having is with the call to cleanParentComponent, which removes the license(s), repository and some other potentially useful info.
Might not be relevant if all modules are yours, but in my. case, where they are actually other packages of which I need to know the license, this call removes everything.

A test using the fineract repo, which you pointed out to me for some tests a while back, seems to work fine with this PR though.

[prabhu]

It's only removing component.license. If we set the fully constructed licenses (with s), it must get retained correctly. Can you check?

[malice00]

It does, that was my first solution. However, things like repository and homepage (aka the externalReferences) are also removed. I figured, since the specs says they are the same type of object as the other components, why not construct them in the same way? Same could actually be said for the root component...

The problem is, I currently can't reproduce #479, even with the same project that I had when I reported the issue. It might have been resolved by one of the other changes I made recently, where the names of the modules have been corrected.

I'll take another stab at it, I just got some ideas!