fix: use a holder to allow "upgrading" LocalBV3Set to a full fat one

[dordsor21]

There was a/some issue(s) that were due to a local set being used assumptively. The only instances of the local sets being explicitly used should now only be when using chunk coords, or for the floating tree remover

[SirYwell]

Do we need to expose BlockVector3SetHolder? I think having a private/package-private class would be better, with static factory methods like BlockVector3Set.expandable() and BlockVector3Set.fromLocal(LocalBlockVectorSet) or something similar.

Also the Cloneable interface/the clone() method are kinda flawed, maybe it's better to just have our own copy() methods.

[dordsor21]

Do we need to expose BlockVector3SetHolder? I think having a private/package-private class would be better, with static factory methods like BlockVector3Set.expandable() and BlockVector3Set.fromLocal(LocalBlockVectorSet) or something similar.

Also the Cloneable interface/the clone() method are kinda flawed, maybe it's better to just have our own copy() methods.

Yeah I can probably move it into the local directly as there's no reason to have a holder for a full fat bv3set.

I also just copied the fact the local already had a clone method tbh, but yeah copy would also be consistent with everything else in FAWE

[SirYwell]

I also noticed CachedMask catches UnsupportedOperationException, should that be adjusted too? I guess those try-catch blocks can just be removed this way?

[SirYwell]

Looks good