[Access] Implement subscribe transaction statuses by transaction ID

[Guitarheroua]

Closes #6573 and #6574

This PR implements a new subscription to a transaction by txID and changes the existing send and subscribe endpoint.

This PR introduces a separate transactionSubscriptionMetadata private module and moves the handling of transactions status logic there to simplify streaming module logic.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 70.61404% with 67 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 41.25%. Comparing base (d5a249f) to head (6004c7a).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...s/rpc/backend/transaction_subscription_metadata.go	62.50%	32 Missing and 10 partials ⚠️
.../access/rpc/backend/backend_stream_transactions.go	75.43%	10 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
access/api.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
access/mock/api.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
cmd/util/cmd/run-script/cmd.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...ts/data_providers/transaction_statuses_provider.go	92.30%	1 Missing ⚠️
engine/access/rpc/backend/backend_transactions.go	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ss/rpc/backend/transactions_local_data_provider.go	85.71%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6737      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   41.24%   41.25%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        2152     2153       +1     
  Lines      189202   189163      -39     
==========================================
+ Hits        78036    78043       +7     
+ Misses     104660   104608      -52     
- Partials     6506     6512       +6     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	41.25% <70.61%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[peterargue]

added a few small comments, but otherwise looks good

[peterargue]

added a couple more comments, but otherwise looks good.

[peterargue]

looks good other than missing irrecoverable error

there was a significant refactor since my review

[peterargue]

added some comments about finishing touches, but otherwise I think this looks good

[peterargue]

@durkmurder can you take another look 🙏

[durkmurder]

First batch of comments, still have tests to review.