Fix waterlogging checking affected location

[nouish]

For blocks that may be waterlogged, checking the relative adjacent location, is wrong. Currently non-trustees may waterlog certain blocks placed on the claim boundary, from outside said claim.

This does not affect waterloggable blocks with containers (chests).

Fixes #1155

[Jikoo]

Why add a manually maintained material list when Waterlogged exists?

[nouish]

Why add a manually maintained material list when Waterlogged exists?

Unfamiliar with the Bukkit/Spigot API, and because not all waterlogged blocks are affected. That said, it shouldn't matter if the unaffected ones are included. Will verify.

[Jikoo]

I'd guess it would actually create an edge case allowing waterlogging by users with ContainerTrust who should not be able to build for those objects.

I suggest something like this (not accurate, sorry, mobile):

Block block = event.getBlock();
if (event.getItem() != Material.WATER_BUCKET || !(block.getBlockData() instanceof Waterlogged))
{
  block = block.getRelative(event.getFace());
}

Is it possible for users without trust to also remove water from waterlogged blocks?

[nouish]

Excellent suggestion!

That also lets me remove that caveat of having to add the handful of waterlogged blocks comming in 1.17 at later date.

I'd guess it would actually create an edge case allowing waterlogging by users with ContainerTrust who should not be able to build for those objects.

Fortunately not 😄 It will never use CT checks for this!

[Jikoo]

Fortunately not 😄 It will never use CT checks for this!

I meant with the manually specified materials not including containers, since GP was likely only blocking the water placement because it thought the player was attempting to access the inventory.

Looks good!

[Jikoo]

Guess I have to review again to dismiss a review, weird. Any rate, need Robo's final approval on this, but you have mine.