[Block Library]: Update the relationship of No results block to ancestor

[ntsekouras]

What?

This PR just add a bit more flexibility to the insertion of No results inside a Query Loop block. Previously you could insert them through the inserter only if they were direct parents of Query Loop, but now they can be inserted in nested blocks(ex Group), as long as they have Query Loop as an ancestor.

Similar with: #67657 and #58602

Testing Instructions

1. Inside a Query Loop block add a Group and then insert through the inserter No results block.
2. The above block cannot be inserted through the inserter if it doesn't have a Query Loop ancestor.
3. No regressions are introduced and everything else should work as before.

[gziolo]

Was there any discussion about which blocks could benefit from using ancestor instead of parent? Comments block could also get similar updates wherever applicable:

Actually, it's the only block that uses that API, but in a slightly different way than this PR explores.

It also made me wonder whether the Comments block doesn't use ancestor for the Comment Template block to avoid the risk of inserting the block into self.

[ntsekouras]

Was there any discussion about which blocks could benefit from using ancestor instead of parent?

In various issues at some point, but not a separate issue. We also introduced a new Query Loop PR that wraps these blocks inside Group blocks. That was my main trigger for this PR right now. I think the main reason for some comment blocks to use this API, is because they cannot work outside of this context at all.

It also made me wonder whether the Comments block doesn't use ancestor for the Comment Template block to avoid the risk of inserting the block into self.

That's a good point and is something we might not want for Post Template... Maybe @ockham or @c4rl0sbr4v0 could share some insights?

[webmandesign]

+1 This would really be great! It would most likely solve my issue #48296 when I want to use core/query-pagination (and also core/comments-pagination) as a Template Part or Pattern.

[github-actions]

The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the props-bot label.

If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.

Co-authored-by: ntsekouras <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mamaduka <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: gziolo <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: webmandesign <[email protected]>

To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook.

[gziolo]

Yeah, good idea to move forward with this change 👍🏻

[github-actions]

Flaky tests detected in 5e67986.
Some tests passed with failed attempts. The failures may not be related to this commit but are still reported for visibility. See the documentation for more information.

🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/12235468898
📝 Reported issues:

• [Flaky Test] Block settings - link DISABLED, lightbox ENABLED - should show UI while block override is active, but hide UI if override is removed #65157 in /test/e2e/specs/editor/blocks/image.spec.js