Draft: TrigEGam:Factorizing FastElectron Step into FastTracking and FastTrack to FastCalo matching step

As discussed in ATR-25499 and ATR-25865 to keep the Fast step of electron independent of FastTracks for idperf chains we factorised fast electron step as following

for idperf

FastCalo
 |
 V
FastTrack
 |
 V
Empty 
 |
 V
PrecisionCalo
 |
 V
PrecisionTracking
 |
 V
GSFRefit

for Nominal electron

FastCalo
 |
 V
FastTrack
 |
 V
FastElectron
 |
 V
PrecisionCalo
 |
 V
PrecisionTracking
 |
 V
GSFRefit
 |
 V
PrecisionElectron

The caveat we are facing for having empty sequence in between we are losing the downstream reconstructions

INFO Chains passing step (1st row events & 2nd row decision counts):
INFO ChainName                     L1         AfterPS    Step1      Step2      Step3      Step4      Step5      Output     
INFO All                           10         10         -          -          -          -          -          10         
INFO HLT_e5_idperf_tight_L1EM3 #1761643260
INFO -- #1761643260 Events         10         10         10         10         -          -          -          10         
INFO -- #1761643260 Features                             44         44         -          -          -  

In clarification I would like to mention our nominal and nogsf step don't use any Empty step after precisionTracking step of nogsf chain the nominal/gsf chain uses different streamline as follows

FastCalo
 |
 V
FastTrack
 |
 V
FastElectron 
 |
 V
PrecisionCalo
 |
 V
PrecisionTracking
 |--------------------|
 V                    V
GSFRefit             PrecisionElectron
 |
 V
PrecisionElectron_gsf

adding @tamartin , @khoo , @sshaw , @cjmeyer , @safarzad , @mark , @tbold for suggestion/help

Thanks, Debo.