I was getting a 405 on .patch() and upon some digging found that this was a actually just a poor response code for what was actually happening, expecting a Content-type header. That response code will be fixed in 8.2 by sending back a 415, but Waterwheel should send the expected headers for PATCH requests regardless.
Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 9d822296cab68eca093ec176fc441bd3dc5181bf on infiniteluke:patch-header into a516f05aca2ff2d4808469c9485072a3c83eed70 on acquia:0.6.0.
Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 5fc2149c8faed59e5ab95da408610a707862963d on infiniteluke:patch-header into a516f05aca2ff2d4808469c9485072a3c83eed70 on acquia:0.6.0.
I was getting a 405 on
.patch()
and upon some digging found that this was a actually just a poor response code for what was actually happening, expecting a Content-type header. That response code will be fixed in 8.2 by sending back a 415, but Waterwheel should send the expected headers for PATCH requests regardless.