LUCENE-10321: Tweak MultiRangeQuery interval tree creation logic

[gsmiller]

Description

Small tweak that makes the interval tree creation logic in MultiRangeQuery consistent with ComponentTree.

Solution

Just remove the "roll up" of min values since internal node bounding boxes don't need consistent min values.

Tests

All existing tests continue to pass.

Checklist

Please review the following and check all that apply:

• I have reviewed the guidelines for How to Contribute and my code conforms to the standards described there to the best of my ability.
• I have created a Jira issue and added the issue ID to my pull request title.
• I have given Lucene maintainers access to contribute to my PR branch. (optional but recommended)
• I have developed this patch against the main branch.
• I have run ./gradlew check.
• I have added tests for my changes.

[iverase]

I would prefer if RangeTree does not implement Range any more as it does not follow the contract. What do you think?

hold on - I think I have another thing in mind :)

So I was thinking we can remove this part as well:

lucene/lucene/sandbox/src/java/org/apache/lucene/sandbox/search/MultiRangeQuery.java

Line 543 in bf2e1da

for (Range range : ranges) {

Then creating the tree should be pretty cheap.

[gsmiller]

I would prefer if RangeTree does not implement Range any more as it does not follow the contract. What do you think?

+1 makes sense

So I was thinking we can remove this part as well:

Yeah, good catch!

I think my new revision addresses both of these suggestions. Thanks for the quick feedback!

[iverase]

LGTM