Fix wiki button directing to ros1 wiki

[EmmanuelMess]

Fixes #92

[EmmanuelMess]

@sloretz please review

[rkent]

I have tested this, and it works. The code also seems fine.

My hesitation is that there are many packages that have been adapted from ROS1 and have their primary documentation still on the wiki. An example is https://index.ros.org/p/ackermann_msgs/ Now that package actually points to the wiki in its README, but others do not. Without this PR, the user sees a working link to the old wiki page since this is also a ROS1 package. With the PR, that link is gone. You could always find it by selecting an older distro though I suppose.

I'm not sure which is preferable. Any thoughts?

[EmmanuelMess]

My hesitation is that there are many packages that have been adapted from ROS1 and have their primary documentation still on the wiki. An example is index.ros.org/p/ackermann_msgs Now that package actually points to the wiki in its README, but others do not. Without this PR, the user sees a working link to the old wiki page since this is also a ROS1 package. With the PR, that link is gone. You could always find it by selecting an older distro though I suppose.

I'm not sure which is preferable. Any thoughts?

(Oh no. And the API link is broken for ROS2.)

In my opinion the bigger issue here is that we can't have the documentation and API spread across multiple pages (http://wiki.ros.org, ros.org, ros2.org) because this inconsistency is not conducive to good developer experience. This is part of the work to consolidate links and improve UX.
Can't work be done to move the docs to the new breathe/inhale system?

[clalancette]

In my opinion the bigger issue here is that we can't have the documentation and API spread across multiple pages (http://wiki.ros.org, ros.org, ros2.org) because this inconsistency is not conducive to good developer experience. This is part of the work to consolidate links and improve UX.
Can't work be done to move the docs to the new breathe/inhale system?

This is actively being done. Both https://wiki.ros.org and https://docs.ros2.org are currently deprecated. The only canonical place to get ROS 2 documentation is on https://docs.ros.org, and https://index.ros.org should point to that.

However, in the particular case of https://wiki.ros.org, we can't take that offline for the rest of the life of ROS 1, and probably for some time after that. And it is not worth the effort to convert ROS 1 to the breathe/exhale system, as it is going EOL in a few months. So I don't know that there is much more we can do here.

[rkent]

The only canonical place to get ROS 2 documentation is on https://docs.ros.org, and https://index.ros.org should point to that.

I take it then @clalancette that you are in favor of NOT showing a link to the wiki page for ros2 packages, which means you are in favor of accepting the current PR?

[clalancette]

I take it then @clalancette that you are in favor of NOT showing a link to the wiki page for ros2 packages, which means you are in favor of accepting the current PR?

Yes, I agree with that.

[rkent]

I don't normally do reviews except for people who have commit access, as I cannot commit myself. But I have tested this, it works, and is good. So here's a so-called "gray checkmark" review.