fix: prevent loading the code block extension twice for plain text

[juliusknorr]

This fixes a warning that occurs as for plain text editing we include the codeBlock extension twice. I noticed this when running tests on #7300

We can only add the extension in our PlainTextExtension as it wraps everything we need for that already. In this case the addition options are just needed to pass them trough to the code block extension.

Fixes tons of warnings like:

stderr | src/tests/plaintext.spec.js > commonmark as plaintext > commonmark 557
[tiptap warn]: Duplicate extension names found: ['codeBlock']. This can lead to issues.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 58.98%. Comparing base (fa7b1d6) to head (0a0827e).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7315      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.09%   58.98%   +6.89%     
==========================================
  Files         483      482       -1     
  Lines       41999    37113    -4886     
  Branches     1047     1048       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        21878    21891      +13     
+ Misses      20018    15120    -4898     
+ Partials      103      102       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[mejo-]

Thanks! Didn't test but looks sensible to me.

I have two smaller remarks, none of them blocking.

[mejo-]

Suggested change

	PlainText.configure({
	PlainText.configure({
	// Options to be passed through to `CodeBlockPlainText`

How about a short code comment here to explain why we pass codeblock config options to the plaintext extension?

[max-nextcloud]

Alternatively the options could be set as a separate object on the code block lowlight key similar to how tiptap defines its options in the starter kit.

[juliusknorr]

Added a comment for now, we can move to separate options if we have some for other extensions being passed as well

[max-nextcloud]

Thanks for looking into this. Also saw it and had it on my todo list. Happy i can strike that off.

[max-nextcloud]

Alternatively the options could be set as a separate object on the code block lowlight key similar to how tiptap defines its options in the starter kit.