Remove inconsistency between bptIn and bptAmountIn

[brunoguerios]

We should keep consistency between bptIn and bptAmountIn throughout the code.

This is a report from @agualis:

Hey team, we already have the nested pool removals working (not yet merged) but I have a DX question:
The Base query output for Remove Liquidity has this type:

b-sdk/src/entities/removeLiquidity/types.ts

Line 69 in df5526f

bptIn: TokenAmount;

where you have the field: bptIn: TokenAmount
You have 3 Permit helpers for signing removals:

declare class PermitHelper {
    static signRemoveLiquidityApproval: (input: RemoveLiquidityBaseBuildCallInput & {
        client: PublicWalletClient;
        owner: Hex;
        nonce?: bigint;
        deadline?: bigint;
    }) => Promise<Permit>;
    static signRemoveLiquidityNestedApproval: (input: {
        bptAmountIn: TokenAmount; // Could we rename this input to bptIn: TokenAmount?
        chainId: ChainId;
        client: PublicWalletClient;
        owner: Hex;
        nonce?: bigint;
        deadline?: bigint;
    }) => Promise<Permit>;
    static signRemoveLiquidityBoostedApproval: (input: RemoveLiquidityBaseBuildCallInput & {
        client: PublicWalletClient;
        owner: Hex;
        nonce?: bigint;
        deadline?: bigint;
    }) => Promise<Permit>;
} 

signRemoveLiquidityApproval and signRemoveLiquidityBoostedApproval use RemoveLiquidityBaseBuildCallInput which in turn uses RemoveLiquidityBaseQueryOutput, so the will both expect bptIn: TokenAmount as an input parameter
However, signRemoveLiquidityNestedApproval
expects bptAmountIn: TokenAmount;
which breaks the TS contract a little bit.
Our code is working by using a little TS casting but it feels dirty and could be confusing for other integrators.
If you have time it would be nice to rename from bptAmountIn to bptIn (If I’m not missing something important)

[johngrantuk]

Once this is done/released please check in with FE team to let them know.