How does dependency resolution handle a dependency that is both direct and transitive?

[Doekin]

I've noticed that if a package (fontconfig) depends on another package (meson), and both packages require the same dependency (python), xmake prompts to install python even if it's already available.

Here's a simplified example:

• meson requires python: add_deps("python 3.x", {kind = "binary"})
• fontconfig requires meson and also python:

  package("fontconfig")
      add_deps("meson", "ninja")
      add_deps("python 3.x", {kind = "binary"})
  
      on_install(function (package)
      end)
      on_test(function (package)
      end)

When installing fontconfig, I get this prompt:

checking for fontconfig ... no
note: install or modify (m) these packages (pass -y to skip confirm)?
in myrepo:
  -> python 3.13.2 [host, binary, from:meson,fontconfig, license:PSF]
  -> fontconfig latest
please input: y (y/n/m)

If I remove the direct python dependency from fontconfig, the prompt becomes

checking for fontconfig ... no
note: install or modify (m) these packages (pass -y to skip confirm)?
  -> fontconfig latest
please input: y (y/n/m)

My question is: Is this the intended behavior? Should a package author avoid declaring a dependency if they know it will be satisfied transitively? Or is this a case where the resolver could potentially de-duplicate the check?