IDF d23b7a0361

[me-no-dev]

lib-builder: feature/ppp_modem_support af46077
esp-idf: d23b7a0361
arduino: feature/ppp_modem_support 4401ef8e
tinyusb: master 42decf28f
chmorgan__esp-libhelix-mp3: 1.0.3
espressif__cbor: 0.6.0~1
espressif__esp-dl:
espressif__esp-dsp: 1.4.12
espressif__esp-nn: 1.0.2
espressif__esp-sr: 1.7.0
espressif__esp-tflite-micro: 1.2.0
espressif__esp-zboss-lib: 1.2.2
espressif__esp-zigbee-lib: 1.2.2
espressif__esp32-camera:
espressif__esp_diag_data_store: 1.0.1
espressif__esp_diagnostics: 1.1.0
espressif__esp_insights: 1.1.0
espressif__esp_modem: 1.1.0
espressif__esp_rainmaker: 1.1.0
espressif__esp_schedule: 1.1.1
espressif__esp_secure_cert_mgr: 2.4.1
espressif__jsmn: 1.1.0
espressif__json_generator: 1.1.2
espressif__json_parser: 1.0.3
espressif__mdns: 1.2.5
espressif__qrcode: 0.1.0~2
espressif__rmaker_common: 1.4.5
joltwallet__littlefs: 1.14.2

[github-actions]

	Warnings
⚠️	Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "Add PPP to configurations": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Add esp_modem component": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Add initial PPP Modem support": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Add more access methods": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "IDF d23b7a0361": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Rename Method": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update CMakeLists.txt": 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).
⚠️	Please consider squashing your 8 commits (simplifying branch history).

👋 Hello me-no-dev, 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.
- 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 bcbdba5