feat: add support for fish

[Sunrisepeak]

Description

add support for fish

Is this user-facing behavior change?

improve for fish shell user

Did you use Generative AI?

Additional Information

• feat: add support for fish ament/ament_package#164
• Add support for Fish shell #326

[skyegalaxy]

(originally had meant to leave the comment here instead)

@Sunrisepeak - I ran your branch locally and the generation of package level fish scripts seems to be working well! I'm a bit confused about your testing setup, however. I would expect that by switching my rolling workspace's ament_package to this branch, that I would see a top level install/setup.fish inside my workspace's install folder, but that doesn't seem to be the case and your test script seems to manually add the setup.fish to /opt/ros/$DISTRO. Is adding the top level autogenerated setup.fish out of scope for this PR?

[Sunrisepeak]

(originally had meant to leave the comment here instead)

@Sunrisepeak - I ran your branch locally and the generation of package level fish scripts seems to be working well! I'm a bit confused about your testing setup, however. I would expect that by switching my rolling workspace's ament_package to this branch, that I would see a top level install/setup.fish inside my workspace's install folder, but that doesn't seem to be the case and your test script seems to manually add the setup.fish to /opt/ros/$DISTRO. Is adding the top level autogenerated setup.fish out of scope for this PR?

@skyegalaxy ament/ament_package#164 (comment)

[skyegalaxy]

Pulls: ament/ament_package#164, #1211
Gist: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/skyegalaxy/4ab9923e4f12b167a21f2a368ffab9b3/raw/fa2526eb1ea4695d8c8a5bd2d39a0709237d25cb/fish_support.repos
BUILD args: --packages-above-and-dependencies ament_package
TEST args: --packages-above ament_package
ROS Distro: rolling
Job: ci_launcher
ci_launcher ran: https://ci.ros2.org/job/ci_launcher/18569/

• Linux
• Linux-aarch64
• Linux-rhel
• Windows

[Sunrisepeak]

• feat: add support for fish ament/ament_package#164 (comment)

@skyegalaxy the ci-unstable seem not related with the pr, Does it need to be rerun?