TreeType Makeover

[ShaneBeee]

Problem

The TreeType class info was super duper outdated:

• Incorrectly named codename "structuretype"
• Missing tree types
• Messy class

Solution

Give TreeType some new life:

• ClassInfo code name changed structuretype -> treetype
• Renamed class from StructureType to TreeSpecies (went with this to not clash with Bukkit "TreeType")
• Switched to use an EnumClassInfo
• Added all the new trees we've gotten over the years
• Removed old code used to handle enum stuff that the EnumClassInfo will handle
• Removed comparator, handled by EnumClassInfo
• Removed parser, handled by EnumClassInfo

Testing Completed

I grew a few trees in game.
They're pretty... wanna see?
No? Too bad.. here they are anyways:

Supporting Information

I did a big renaming of the tree types in the lang file, but since this has never been documented, I don't think anyone will miss the weird ones I took out.
I went with names that better match the actual names of the trees vs. weird names Bukkit used from 15 years ago.

---

Completes: #8634
Related: none
AI assistance: none

[sovdeeth]

Is it possible to test growing a tree? Or do we already have a test for that? I think on grow may do something similar.

[ShaneBeee]

Is it possible to test growing a tree? Or do we already have a test for that? I think on grow may do something similar.

My fear is since internally its attempting to place a configured feature,
if the feature for whatever reason fails to place, the effect will be unsuccessful.

[sovdeeth]

Is it possible to test growing a tree? Or do we already have a test for that? I think on grow may do something similar.

My fear is since internally its attempting to place a configured feature, if the feature for whatever reason fails to place, the effect will be unsuccessful.

yeah that's why the test should ensure the conditions for the tree to be grown should be valid (eg clear an area, place a dirt block, etc