[SaaS Connector] Outreach (Erasures)

[galvana]

Purpose

Adds erasure functionality for Outreach.

Changes

The following endpoints were added as deletes

prospects
POST /api/v2/complianceRequests

{
  "data": {
    "type": "complianceRequest",
    "attributes": {
      "requester_email": "<requester_email>",
      "request_type": "Delete",
      "object_type": "Prospect",
      "request_object_email": "<email>"
    }
  }
}

recipients
POST /api/v2/complianceRequests

{
  "data": {
    "type": "complianceRequest",
    "attributes": {
      "requester_email": "<requester_email>",
      "request_type": "Delete",
      "object_type": "Recipient",
      "request_object_email": "<email>"
    }
  }
}

Checklist

• Update CHANGELOG.md file
  • Merge in main so the most recent CHANGELOG.md file is being appended to
  • Add description within the Unreleased section in an appropriate category. Add a new category from the list at the top of the file if the needed one isn't already there.
  • Add a link to this PR at the end of the description with the PR number as the text. example: #1
• Good unit test/integration test coverage

Ticket

Fixes #618

[galvana]

In YAML the pipe | is used to indicate a "block scalar" value (multiline text). This allows us to denote JSON payloads inline with YAML while avoiding having to escape single or double quotes.

[adamsachs]

that's cool, good thing i got to review this PR and learn something new :)

[galvana]

Adding this to include descriptions for fields that need more of an explanation than what can just be assumed from the name alone. Currently there is no additional logic in Fidesops that makes use of this information but this could be helpful when for when we have a UI to create/manage SaaS configs.

[adamsachs]

generally looks good, one very minor comment on whether to include a certain config in the .toml but if i'm mistaken on that then let me know and i'll 👍

[adamsachs]

since this is dynamically generated in the fixture (which i like), does it need to be in the toml? (specifically the erasure_identity_email). it seems like it could be misleading. but my understanding may be off.

[galvana]

That's a good point, removed!

[adamsachs]

this all looks good so i'm going to approve but @galvana seems like a merge conflict arose (just FYI)