Adding request overrides for consent requests

[galvana]

Closes #PROD-1526

Description Of Changes

Adding the ability to specify SaaS request overrides of type OPT_IN and OPT_OUT

Code Changes

• Added OPT_IN and OPT_OUT request override types and related tests
• Misc cleanup of existing request override fixtures and tests

Steps to Confirm

• Refer to new tests for consent request overrides

Pre-Merge Checklist

• All CI Pipelines Succeeded
• Issue Requirements are Met
• Update CHANGELOG.md

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
fides-plus-nightly	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	May 31, 2024 10:00pm

[cypress]

Passing run #7961 ↗︎

0	4	0	0	0
⚠️ You've recorded test results over your free plan limit. Upgrade your plan to view test results.

Details:

Merge 623041b into a000f2b...
Project: fides	Commit: 46a8ff4ac0 ℹ️
Status: Passed	Duration: 00:34 💡
Started: May 28, 2024 4:46 PM	Ended: May 28, 2024 4:46 PM

Review all test suite changes for PR #4920 ↗︎

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 70.58824% with 10 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 86.91%. Comparing base (a000f2b) to head (623041b).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/fides/api/service/connectors/saas_connector.py	73.91%	6 Missing ⚠️
...vice/saas_request/saas_request_override_factory.py	63.63%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4920      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   86.79%   86.91%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         347      346       -1     
  Lines       21213    21202      -11     
  Branches     2784     2785       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        18412    18428      +16     
+ Misses       2312     2285      -27     
  Partials      489      489              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[adamsachs]

@galvana this looks solid to me, nice work! i like that this override framework is continuing to expand in what feels like a pretty natural way :)

i left a few nits that you can feel free to take or leave. i assume there's going to be a real use case coming up to leverage these overrides, in which case we'll put it to the test! that's usually the best confirmation that the override has what it needs and there aren't any unexpected issues - but i think it makes sense to put the (proposed) framework updates you have here as their own increment, and then follow up with the first implementation after 👍

[adamsachs]

nit: is there any way to split this out into a fixture? or its own file/module? it totally makes sense that you moved this into the tests package generally (thank you for that!), but it may be nice to keep this separated from the test code itself just so that it can still serve as a standalone reference? not a big deal if it it's a pain!

[adamsachs]

nit: this looks like a c+p error, i don't think there's any data prep done here!