Bump and fix errors for release 2025.06

[vga91]

Bump and fix errors for release 2025.06

Tests executed

// create point layer
CALL spatial.addPointLayer('storesLayer');

// create stores
CREATE (s:Store {
    name: 'Downtown Store',
    latitude: 40.851,
    longitude: 14.268
})
WITH s
CALL spatial.addNode('storesLayer', s) YIELD node
RETURN node;

CREATE (s:Store {
    name: 'Station Store',
    latitude: 40.853,
    longitude: 14.272
})
WITH s
CALL spatial.addNode('storesLayer', s) YIELD node
RETURN node;

// Search for all stores within 1 km of this position
CALL spatial.withinDistance('storesLayer', {latitude: 40.852, longitude: 14.270}, 1.0) YIELD node AS store, distance
RETURN store.name, distance
ORDER BY distance;

Additional infos

There are 4 tests that (locally) fail with StackOverflowError.

RTreeBulkInsertTest.shouldInsertManyNodesInBulkWithGreenesSplit_medium_10 » StackOverflow
RTreeBulkInsertTest.shouldInsertManyNodesInBulkWithGreenesSplit_small_10 » StackOverflow
RTreeBulkInsertTest.shouldInsertManyNodesInBulkWithQuadraticSplit_medium_10 » StackOverflow
RTreeBulkInsertTest.shouldInsertManyNodesInBulkWithQuadraticSplit_small_10 » StackOverflow

The strange thing is that they fail also if i execute them using the 5.26.0 / 5.20.0 tags,
and that they don't fail in the CI as we can see here.
Instead locally, using the same command and jdk (i.e. jdk: 17.0.15-tem and ./mvnw --no-transfer-progress clean compile test -Dtest=RTreeBulkInsertTest) they fail.
Moreover, by adding the maxNodeReference to 20 (i.e. the 3rd parameter here),
they are executed correctly.
Therefore i'm not sure if it's a bug or something strange that i have locally or some particular CI config that i don't have locally,
but i think we can skip them since the jar seems to be generated correctly and they are green in the CI.

[Andy2003]

please remove System.out.println

[vga91]

removed

[Andy2003]

why downgrading this version?

[vga91]

Sorry, I don't remember how it happened. I probably took it from here by mistake.
I reset it as actually it's not needed.

[Andy2003]

@vga91 Have you already signed the CLA?

[vga91]

@Andy2003 I signed the CLA, thanks

[Andy2003]

The changes of this PR are already included into the current main branch