Add new migration case of WebMvcConfigurer

[SiBorea]

What's changed?

The origin recipe only handle classes that extend WebMvcConfigurer. In some cases, people return new WebMvcConfigurer() directly as a bean.

Checklist

• [✅] I've added unit tests to cover both positive and negative cases
• [✅] I've read and applied the recipe conventions and best practices
• [✅] I've used the IntelliJ IDEA auto-formatter on affected files

[timtebeek]

Neither WebMvcConfigurerAdapter nor WebMvcConfigurer takes in an generic type right? Would we even need the handling here then?

Suggested change

	} else if (newClass.getClazz() instanceof J.ParameterizedType) {
	J.ParameterizedType parameterizedType = (J.ParameterizedType) newClass.getClazz();
	newClass = newClass.withClazz(parameterizedType
	.withType(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER_TYPE)
	.withClazz(TypeTree.build(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER).withType(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER_TYPE))
	);

[timtebeek]

Great to see these additional cases covered! Thanks a lot for the continued work on improvements here.

A quick question and two code suggestions before we merge, but otherwise this looks perfect already.

[timtebeek]

Suggested change

	} else if (md.getReturnTypeExpression() instanceof J.ParameterizedType) {
	J.ParameterizedType parameterizedType = (J.ParameterizedType) md.getReturnTypeExpression();
	md = md.withReturnTypeExpression(parameterizedType
	.withType(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER_TYPE)
	.withClazz(TypeTree.build(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER).withType(WEB_MVC_CONFIGURER_TYPE))
	);