boards/nrf52dk: fix doc

[maribu]

Contribution description

The board definition of the nrf52dk was likely created for some clone board. However, an official board name nRF52 DK provided by Nordic also exists. This resulted in previous contributors in confusing this with the official board and "fixing" the board definition to match the nRF52 DK board.

Or maybe it always has been meant to be the official board and someone just added a wrong image to it.

In either case, this brings the documentation back in alignment with the code by replacing references to some random clone board and the image of the random clone board with those to/of the official Nordic nRF52 DK board.

Testing procedure

Proof reading the doc should be sufficient. In addition, one may want to check that e.g. the button and LED definitions in SAUL indeed work with a legitimate nRF52 DK board (it does so for me).

Issues/PRs references

None

[chrysn]

Can confirm that the LEDs and buttons work.

On documentation changes, I think that the old picture should be removed (or there should be text that there are nRF52-DK compatible boards around that look like that ... but it doesn't look compatible to me). Other than that, looks good.

I'd prefer to only start cleaning up boards once we have consensus on #18589 and thus a good reason to rename boards around -- but it seems that that process is broken.

[maribu]

I think that the old picture should be removed

Agreed. Actually, the commit and PR description claim I already did so, but I seem to have forgot to do that. I fixed and directly squashed.

I'd prefer to only start cleaning up boards once we have consensus on #18589

I would generally agree if this is about renaming and cleaning. But IMO this here is rather a bug fix. The board in the picture has no buttons, no LEDs, no integrated J-Link. Yet, the board definitions have LEDs, buttons and a J-Link programmer set up all in alignment with the genuine nRF52 DK board.

So the doc and the code are indeed contradicting each other. At this point, we should either fix the doc to match the code, or adapt the code to indeed implement the clone board the doc claims it implements. IMO it is easier and more sensible to fix the doc.

Looking at the git log it seems that no only I have been using the board definition with genuine nRF52 DK boards without ever looking into the rendered doc, but at least @aabadie and @fjmolinas seem to have also done so.

[maribu]

Btw: A git blame of the clone picture yields

commit a1e17ab5afc01d89c66b2cc732e11d4ce0ad2058
Author: Jose Alamos <jose.alamos@haw-hamburg.de>
Date:   Thu Jul 26 11:48:55 2018 +0200

    doc: add wiki documentation to Doxygen files

Another git blame of Board:-nRF52-minidev.md in the Github Wiki yields:

commit 161b5e85e4ad08a5bd69ea2b9a87f34150dc8671
Author: d00616 <d00616@users.noreply.github.com>
Date:   Mon Oct 3 17:51:19 2016 +0200

    Initial

Judging from the name nRF52-minidev in the wiki page, I'm pretty sure the picture was never intended to land in the place it ended up.

[chrysn]

Agreed, this is more of a bug fix. Thanks for fixing this.