fix(ci): Fix IDF examples compilation when changing source files

[lucasssvaz]

Description of Change

This pull request introduces a targeted enhancement to the logic for determining affected sketches in component mode. The main change ensures that when any source or header file (excluding .ino files) within the cores/ or libraries/ directories is modified, all IDF component examples are automatically flagged for recompilation. This helps maintain build integrity in response to low-level code changes.

Component mode logic improvements:

• Added a check to recompile all IDF component examples if any source or header file (except .ino files) in cores/ or libraries/ is changed, ensuring comprehensive coverage for critical component updates.

Test Scenarios

Tested locally

[github-actions]

	Messages
📖	🎉 Good Job! All checks are passing!

👋 Hello lucasssvaz, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 93562ff

[github-actions]

Memory usage test (comparing PR against master branch)

The table below shows the summary of memory usage change (decrease - increase) in bytes and percentage for each target.

Memory	FLASH [bytes]		FLASH [%]		RAM [bytes]		RAM [%]
Target	DEC	INC	DEC	INC	DEC	INC	DEC	INC
ESP32C5	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32P4	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32S3	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32S2	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32C3	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32C6	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32H2	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00
ESP32	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00

Click to expand the detailed deltas report [usage change in BYTES]

Target	ESP32C5		ESP32P4		ESP32S3		ESP32S2		ESP32C3		ESP32C6		ESP32H2		ESP32
Example	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM	FLASH	RAM
libraries/BLE/examples/Server	0	0	0	0	0	0	-	-	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
libraries/Insights/examples/MinimalDiagnostics	0	0	-	-	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	-	-	0	0
libraries/NetworkClientSecure/examples/WiFiClientSecure	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	-	-	0	0
libraries/ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer	-	-	-	-	0	0	0	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	0	0
ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer (2)	-	-	-	-	0	0	0	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	0	0
ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer (3)	-	-	-	-	0	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-