Feature/source freshness hooks

[MichelleArk]

resolves #5609

Problem

Currently, on-run-* hooks are not supported in the dbt source freshness command, this PR makes it so it does.

Solution

Changed the FreshnessTask class to inherit from RunTask (as all other task types that support hooks do).

Alternative solutions:

• Move the hook logic to GraphRunnableTask and disabling in CompileTask - feels a little messier (disabling parent functionality in inheriter).
• Create a HookTask in the middle of the inheritance tree - seems like a lot more work when every other hook-able task just inherits from RunTask.

Additionally, this change has been made backwards-compatible with previous versions of dbt which did not include project hooks by default for dbt source freshness commands via a project flag + tests added across the different scenarios (default configuration, flag explicitly disabled, flag explicitly enabled)

Checklist

• I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me
• I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for this PR
• This PR has no interface changes (e.g. macros, cli, logs, json artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX
• This PR includes type annotations for new and modified functions

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (c547aac) 86.98% compared to head (002c3c4) 87.03%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9366      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   86.98%   87.03%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         187      187              
  Lines       24971    25026      +55     
==========================================
+ Hits        21722    21782      +60     
+ Misses       3249     3244       -5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	84.48% <100.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
unit	63.33% <76.47%> (+0.08%)	⬆️

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.

[MichelleArk]

Initial review covering first 2 commits of this change: #9322 (comment)

[gshank]

This looks fine. As things for possible future improvements, that whole flags processing thing is getting complicated. We should look for an opportunity to refactor it. Also mixing in different Status enums is something that's not wonderful. We need to do a rethink of all of those status codes sometime. It might be better to have a single enum instead of all of these different ones.

[MichelleArk]

As things for possible future improvements, that whole flags processing thing is getting complicated. We should look for an opportunity to refactor it.

Yeah, I agree. It's definitely got a lot of responsibilities and is quite aware of dbt-specific CLI flags even though it's meant to be more generalized. In the meantime, I've added an additional unit test for the project-only flag behaviour so it'll be safer to refactor in the future.

Also mixing in different Status enums is something that's not wonderful. We need to do a rethink of all of those status codes sometime. It might be better to have a single enum instead of all of these different ones.

We may be able to take a stab at this with some of the ongoing dbt/artifacts refactoring, but agree it shouldn't block this work.

[FishtownBuildBot]

Opened a new issue in dbt-labs/docs.getdbt.com: dbt-labs/docs.getdbt.com#4787