Your sentence as it stands has a number of other issues, so let's consider a simpler sentence:
The album orders haven't been sent out yet.
The album orders didn't get sent out yet.
In both sentences, the orders have not been sent at the time of speaking. If you wanted, as you suggest, to say that they hadn't been sent in the past but they have been now, you'd need to say:
The album orders hadn't been sent out yet.
As for "haven't been" versus "didn't get," they are more or less interchangeable. The only differences, to my ear, are that "didn't get" (1) is slightly more informal, and (2) places slightly more emphasis on the (implied) person responsible for shipping the albums out.
You are really asking two questions rolled into one.
There's the question of what is grammatically correct, and all of your examples are well-formed, grammatically speaking. They're even idiomatic, in that they are sentences that native English speakers might use.
The problem is, while they're idiomatic, for an awful lot of English speakers, they would be idiomatic for a hostile or suspicious interaction.
Your second, implicit, question is perhaps best stated, What question might a husband ask to solicit information from his wife about what she did that day?
This is really not an English language question, but an English language speakers culture question. Because here's the thing: very many people in English-speaking cultures would find directly being asked to account for their time to be rude. Not hugely rude, necessarily, but subtly disrespectful.
The conventional friendly way to express interest in how someone spent their day is to ask a question about how their day was – meaning whether they found it good or bad, agreeable or disagreeable – rather than asking what they did.
This is generally understood to be a prompt to disclose what details of how one spent one's day as one prefers to share, without pressuring one to account for oneself and one's time.
So it might look like:
Husband: And how was your day, today?
Wife: Ugh, the Throckmorton-Swift account turned out to be even more a fiasco than we thought, and I had to spend four hours in down in Accounting with that bozo, Jean, trying to find all the reports. Thank goodness the Veep of Sales took us out for consolatory beers after. How about you?
If you're wondering, "But, what if she just says, 'It was fine' and doesn't disclose any information...?!" that's the point: she's not being pressured to disclose, so she might very well not chose to disclose. That's why it's considered polite, where asking her point blank what she did is not.
This comes up in a big way in parent-child interactions. Parents can get away with asking their younger children "What did you do at school today?", but as they get older, typically in their teens, children begin to take offense at being asked point-blank like that. Hence the conventional – to the point of being a joke – teen response of, "Nothing". Parents often feel entitled to ask – because they feel entitled to know what their kid is up to – and are reluctant to ask the politer question, "How was your day?" because they don't want to be dismissed with a simple, "Fine."
Best Answer
No, it's not possible to make that change, although there are similar situations where it might be possible.
To make things clearer, here is an example where there is certainly only one correct choice:
It is definitely impossible to say is here, because the state of her being hungry is in the past. This is the opposite of what is done in Slavic languages, where the equivalent of is would be required, because the tense in reported speech is determined from the point of view of the person at the time they're speaking. In English, as in most Germanic and Romance languages, it is the point of view of the narrator that matters.
There are cases in which things are not so clear-cut, however. Here is one case where you have a choice:
Here, even from the narrator's present perspective, there are two ways of looking at the situation. The first is to consider the statement "Oxygen is heavier than carbon" to be a timeless truth, the time at which the statement was made therefore being irrelevant. This corresponds to the use of is. The other possibility is to follow the general rule illustrated above even though in this case the statement refers to a timeless truth.
Here is another situation where you have a choice:
(In either case, the words "next week" refer to what would be called "next week" relative to the present, not relative to yesterday.) Here it is again irrelevant whether we view the statement as having been true yesterday when it was made, or as being true now. There is no suggestion that the speaker might have changed her mind, or would say anything different now. Hence both tenses are possible. If the narrator uses "will be," then he is presenting the information as being equivalent in a practical sense whether viewed from the present or from the time it was originally conveyed. Perhaps the most cautious thing to do, if there was any doubt, would be to use would (which is the tense we use for the "future in the past").
In the following situation, only would is possible.
To return to your example, here is another sentence that is possible.
However, in your example, the princess is a character in a story that is being narrated in the past tense. The princess doesn't exist in the present, so it would make no sense to say that she "doesn't" like staying home all day.