[MRG] auto-add event_id key for BAD_ACQ_SKIP

[drammock]

PR Description

closes #1257

write_raw_bids will now allow the situation where BAD_ACQ_SKIP annotations are present in the raw file, but no corresponding key is present in the user-passed event_id dict.

Merge checklist

Maintainer, please confirm the following before merging. If applicable:

• [ ] All comments are resolved
• [ ] This is not your own PR
• [ ] All CIs are happy
• [x] PR title starts with [MRG]
• [x] whats_new.rst is updated
• [x] New contributors have been added to CITATION.cff
• [x] PR description includes phrase "closes <#issue-number>"

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 97.46%. Comparing base (87eea28) to head (aff3f57). Report is 26 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #1258 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 97.61% 97.46% -0.16% ========================================== Files 40 40 Lines 8685 8703 +18 ========================================== + Hits 8478 8482 +4 - Misses 207 221 +14 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[drammock]

IDK what codecov is complaining about: from the diff on their site it looks like 100% of the new lines are hit

[sappelhoff]

IDK what codecov is complaining about: from the diff on their site it looks like 100% of the new lines are hit

I find the following suspicious:

BASE commit is 26 commits behind HEAD on main c87a823

see: https://app.codecov.io/gh/mne-tools/mne-bids/pull/1258

it's using 87eea28 as the BASE commit, which is really outdated 🤔 I would have expected it to use HEAD as the BASE commit (c87a823)

[drammock]

all green except codecov (which as discussed is misbehaving here; PR coverage is 100%)

[hoechenberger]

Great, thanks, Dan!