🚨🚨 ✨ Source Google Search Console: adding data_state parameter

[artusiep]

What

Adding data_state, which could make data fresher from the google search console API

Issue: #10402

How

Adding a parameter that is set for a whole source.

Note: setting the parameter to data_state to all could result in missing data / malformed data. This may be caused during Incremental Sync as read data could not be final, but state records will be emitted.

Recommended reading order

1. airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-google-search-console/source_google_search_console/spec.jsona
2. airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-google-search-console/source_google_search_console/source.py
3. airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-google-search-console/source_google_search_console/streams.py
4. airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-google-search-console/unit_tests/unit_test.py

🚨 User Impact 🚨

There should be no user impact on that change as the default value is set of data_stateto final.
This should be a minor change.

Pre-merge Actions

Community member or Airbyter

• Grant edit access to maintainers (instructions)
• Unit & integration tests added

Airbyter

If this is a community PR, the Airbyte engineer reviewing this PR is responsible for the below items.

• Create a non-forked branch based on this PR and test the below items on it
• Build is successful
• If new credentials are required for use in CI, add them to GSM. Instructions.

[github-actions]

Before Merging a Connector Pull Request

Wow! What a great pull request you have here! 🎉

To merge this PR, ensure the following has been done/considered for each connector added or updated:

• PR name follows PR naming conventions
• Breaking changes are considered. If a Breaking Change is being introduced, ensure an Airbyte engineer has created a Breaking Change Plan and you've followed all steps in the Breaking Changes Checklist
• Connector version has been incremented in the Dockerfile and metadata.yaml according to our Semantic Versioning for Connectors guidelines
• Secrets in the connector's spec are annotated with airbyte_secret
• All documentation files are up to date. (README.md, bootstrap.md, docs.md, etc...)
• Changelog updated in docs/integrations/<source or destination>/<name>.md with an entry for the new version. See changelog example
• You, or an Airbyter, have run /test successfully on this PR - or on a non-forked branch
• You've updated the connector's metadata.yaml file (new!)

If the checklist is complete, but the CI check is failing,

1. Check for hidden checklists in your PR description

2. Toggle the github label checklist-action-run on/off to re-run the checklist CI.

[sajarin]

/test connector=connectors/source-google-search-console

🕑 connectors/source-google-search-console https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/actions/runs/5072285562
✅ connectors/source-google-search-console https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/actions/runs/5072285562
Python tests coverage:

Name                                                            Stmts   Miss  Cover
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
source_google_search_console/exceptions.py                          2      0   100%
source_google_search_console/__init__.py                            2      0   100%
source_google_search_console/streams.py                           139      8    94%
source_google_search_console/source.py                             93     11    88%
source_google_search_console/service_account_authenticator.py      14      6    57%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL                                                             250     25    90%

Build Passed

Test summary info:

=========================== short test summary info ============================
SKIPPED [1] ../usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/connector_acceptance_test/tests/test_core.py:578: The previous and actual discovered catalogs are identical.
================== 40 passed, 1 skipped in 928.41s (0:15:28) ===================

[sajarin]

@lazebnyi would it be too much trouble to take a quick look at this PR and give your approval if it's okay to merge?

[lazebnyi]

LGTM!

[lazebnyi]

I believe it would be beneficial to include this information in the field description within the spec file.