feat: adds webdav methods that require body & content type parsing

[johaven]

• run npm run test and npm run benchmark
• tests and/or benchmarks are included
• documentation is changed or added
• commit message and code follows the Developer's Certification of Origin
  and the Code of conduct

Adds webdav methods that require parsing, missing from this PR: #3836

[metcoder95]

Can you add some tests for them?

[johaven]

These methods are already tested in the PR I mentioned

[metcoder95]

Seems lint is failing

[mcollina]

A test is needed

[gurgunday]

Oh this PR is fine, my mistake

I meant to talk about this issue where you suggested backporting #4409, that would be breaking

[gurgunday]

The modified tests simply changed the execution at: https://github.com/fastify/fastify/pull/5411/files#diff-15a9e086692377c86b02752c54c928f4ca6f697758fc5dacc09bbde1d2dff96bR32-R45

Not sure if coverage is enabled but now the case where content-type is undefined may not be getting tested, so I think it would be better to add these as separate tests; just add one more request to each test with the header

[gurgunday]

And also not familiar with webdav but just pointing out that UNLOCK method wasn't added anywhere if that was unintentional

[johaven]

After a check in the webdav RFC, UNLOCK method does not require a body, a mistake fixed in 54bf25c

I forgot to update the doc, sorry !

[johaven]

done in d59e594

[johaven]

The modified tests simply changed the execution at: https://github.com/fastify/fastify/pull/5411/files#diff-15a9e086692377c86b02752c54c928f4ca6f697758fc5dacc09bbde1d2dff96bR32-R45

Not sure if coverage is enabled but now the case where content-type is undefined may not be getting tested, so I think it would be better to add these as separate tests; just add one more request to each test with the header

Done in 97ff092

[gurgunday]

lgtm

[gurgunday]

Just a note: tests were modified, which means behavior has changed, but these methods work with a body, and it really seems like an oversight from the original PR that added them, so I take it as a bugfix

[johaven]

Just a note: tests were modified, which means behavior has changed, but these methods work with a body, and it really seems like an oversight from the original PR that added them, so I take it as a bugfix

It depends on the methods concerned but the RFC is rather flexible as you can see here (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4918#section-9.1) :

A client may choose not to submit a request body.  An empty PROPFIND
  request body MUST be treated as if it were an 'allprop' request.

Overall I agree with you, I think that indeed the tests were not complete but part of the implementation was missing.

[mcollina]

lgtm