Add Angular Accelerometer and Linear Velocity Sensor Interfaces to the Sensor Remapper

[nicktrem]

• This PR will allow the angular acceleration and linear velocity measurements measured by a particular sensor to be extracted and used via the sensor remapper.

[update-docs]

Thanks for opening this pull request! The maintainers of this repository would appreciate it if you would update the release notes by adding a file in doc/release/<target_branch>, based on your changes.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[traversaro]

@randaz81 this is a contribution from an AMI team member, I will iterate on with with @nicktrem, and when it is ready for review I will let you know, thanks!

[traversaro]

@nicktrem I see that there are some conflicts, probably you can look into solving them. For the conflict in the autogenerated files, it is probably easier if you just regenerated them once you solved the other conflicts.

[randaz81]

This value should not be modified

[nicktrem]

Fixed in 3c5625e

[randaz81]

Is this PR complete? @nicktrem @traversaro

[traversaro]

Can we just add the new value at the end for avoiding changing the value of the constants unless strictly necessary?

[nicktrem]

Fixed in 8ec2a36

[traversaro]

My only blocking comment is https://github.com/robotology/yarp/pull/3149/files#r1856392918 . Beside that, this introduces a communication incompatibility between YARP 3.10 and YARP master for multipleanalogsensorsserver and multipleanalogsensorsclient, but I guess this is kind of expected and documented, so once https://github.com/robotology/yarp/pull/3149/files#r1856392918 is addressed this is ready for be reviewed for me.

[nicktrem]

The development of this branch has been completed. I have marked this PR as ready to review.

@randaz81 @traversaro please let me know if there are any additional requests, Thanks!

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
33.1% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 80%)
29.2% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[traversaro]

@randaz81 for me the PR is good to go.