ci(push): Optimize chunk counting to avoid empty chunks

[lucasssvaz]

Description of Change

This pull request updates the chunking logic in the set_ci_output function within .github/scripts/get_affected.py to better distribute sketches across CI chunks. The new approach ensures that chunks are created only as needed, preventing empty chunks and aligning with the logic used in sketch_utils.sh.

Improvements to CI chunk calculation:

• Updated the chunking algorithm to create one chunk per sketch when the number of sketches is less than or equal to the maximum allowed chunks, and to distribute sketches evenly across chunks when there are more sketches than the maximum, using ceiling division to avoid empty chunks.
• Added informative print statements to clarify how chunks are being allocated based on the number of sketches and maximum chunks.

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 ef4f53d

[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
ESP32	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
ESP32C5	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
ESP32P4	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
ESP32S3	0	0	0.00	0.00	0	0	0.00	0.00

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

Target	ESP32		ESP32C3		ESP32C5		ESP32C6		ESP32H2		ESP32P4		ESP32S2		ESP32S3
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/ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer	0	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0	0	0	0
ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer (2)	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
ESP32/examples/Camera/CameraWebServer (3)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0	0

[P-R-O-C-H-Y]

Looking good.