feat(boards): add Waveshare ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED boards

[wurongmin]

1. I have added three products of ESP32S3: ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED-1.43, ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED-1.64, ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED-1.91.
2. Among them, ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED-1.91 has been sold online. The link below: https://www.waveshare.net/shop/ESP32-S3-Touch-AMOLED-1.91.htm. Others will be available soon.
3. I believe many people will like our product because it is able to customize their own board name. This will further strengthen our campaign.

[github-actions]

	Warnings
⚠️	Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "Add files via upload": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Add files via upload": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Delete variants/waveshare_esp32_s3_touch_amoled_143/pins_arduino.h": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Delete variants/waveshare_esp32_s3_touch_amoled_164 directory": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Delete variants/waveshare_esp32_s3_touch_amoled_191 directory": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "feat(boards): Three variants of the development board were added": body's lines must not be longer than 100 characters 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).

	Messages
📖	This PR seems to be quite large (total lines of code: 93304), you might consider splitting it into smaller PRs

👋 Hello wurongmin, 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 01e10ba

[wurongmin]

Hi, I was wondering, what's wrong with this