Adds SparkFun Pro Micro C3 Variant File

[edspark]

Description of Change

Adds the SparkFun Pro Micro C3 Variant File and adds the board to boards.txt.

Tests scenarios

Tested with v2.0.11 of the Espressif ESP32 Arduino Core.

Related links

This is the related product

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[github-actions]

Warnings

⚠️

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "Adds SparkFun Pro Micro ESP32-C3 variant file": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Attempts again to fix camel case in the variant file": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "removes some pin definitions that are defined elsewhere": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "removes the accidental camel case in variant folder name": summary looks empty type/action looks empty Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

	Messages
📖	You might consider squashing your 5 commits (simplifying branch history).

👋 Hello edspark, we appreciate your contribution to 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.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- Addressing info messages (📖) is strongly recommended; they're less critical but valuable.
- 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 4fcf69a

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

@edspark PTAL on my comments.

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

Fix variant folder name to lowercase.

[edspark]

Fixed!

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

Compilation still fails. The folder name was not changed in the last commit. PTAL @edspark

[edspark]

Actually fixed this time, I'm not sure why it didn't take the first time.