cmake(bugfix):add INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES for nimble

[xuxin930]

Summary

/github/workspace/sources/apps/examples/nimble/nimble_main.c:40:10: fatal error: nimble/nimble_npl.h: No such file or directory
40 | #include "nimble/nimble_npl.h"
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.

Impact

bugfix

Testing

cmake -B build -DBOARD_CONFIG=nrf52840-dk/sdc_nimble -GNinja

build pass

[nuttxpr]

[Experimental Bot, please feedback here]

No, this PR does not fully meet the NuttX requirements. While it identifies a build issue and appears to fix it, it severely lacks critical information. Here's why:

• Insufficient Summary: The summary only shows a compiler error. It doesn't explain why the error occurred, what change was made to fix it, how the fix works, or if any related NuttX issues exist. What was the root cause of the missing header? Was a path incorrect? Was a dependency missing? Was the header added? How?
• Incomplete Impact Assessment: While "bugfix" is a start, it's too vague. Which architectures/boards does this fix affect? Are there any implications for users (do they need to rebuild anything)? Does it change anything in the build system itself? Documentation?
• Missing Testing Details: It mentions a build command but provides no actual logs. We need to see build output before the change showing the failure and after the change demonstrating the successful build. "build pass" is not sufficient evidence. Crucially, it also lacks details about the host build environment.

In short, the PR needs to provide a clear explanation of the problem, the solution, and verifiable evidence that the solution works. Simply stating there was a compile error and it's now fixed is not enough information for proper review and integration.