feat: use Ciqual table 2025 version in addition to 2020

[stephanegigandet]

We currently use the 2020 Ciqual table in Product Opener. There is an updated 2025 table.

This PR adds the 2025 table, and we still use the 2020 table as fallback. This is because some Ciqual codes from 2020 do not exist in the Ciqual table 2025.

Total entries in 2020: 3185
Total entries in 2025: 3484

Only in 2020: 182
Only in 2025: 481
In both versions: 3003

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 81.25000% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 54.40%. Comparing base (be295b4) to head (2a310f5).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
lib/ProductOpener/NutritionCiqual.pm	81.25%	1 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #14306      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   50.31%   54.40%   +4.09%     
==========================================
  Files         103      104       +1     
  Lines       26400    26475      +75     
  Branches     6316     6330      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits        13282    14403    +1121     
+ Misses      11357    10128    -1229     
- Partials     1761     1944     +183     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration-test-group-1	13.08% <0.00%> (?)
integration-test-group-2	9.20% <0.00%> (?)
integration-test-group-3	9.37% <0.00%> (?)
integration-test-group-5	28.82% <78.12%> (?)
integration-test-group-6	9.14% <0.00%> (?)
integration-test-group-7	9.62% <0.00%> (?)
integration-test-group-9	26.77% <78.12%> (?)
unit-test-group-1	25.07% <78.12%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
unit-test-group-2	31.32% <81.25%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
unit-test-group-3	33.62% <81.25%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
unit-test-group-4	22.34% <78.12%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
unit-test-group-5	28.34% <78.12%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
unit-test-group-6	21.56% <78.12%> (+0.04%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[stephanegigandet]

/update_tests_results

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[Freso]

Do we need to keep both the source .xls and derived .csv’s around? If so, maybe we could store the .xls files in git-lfs storage rather than directly in the git repository itself? (The repository is already rather big even without adding (more) MB-size binary blobs to it…)