README: Explicitly link to the example recipe

[gmarkall]

There are two example recipes, one for the original format and one for the v1 format. Since the v1 format is not yet ready to go (see conda-forge/conda-forge.github.io#2308), this PR explicitly links to the original format example, to help people avoid choosing the wrong one (as I did for #27600).

Checklist

• Title of this PR is meaningful: e.g. "Adding my_nifty_package", not "updated meta.yaml".
• License file is packaged (see here for an example).
• Source is from official source.
• Package does not vendor other packages. (If a package uses the source of another package, they should be separate packages or the licenses of all packages need to be packaged).
• If static libraries are linked in, the license of the static library is packaged.
• Package does not ship static libraries. If static libraries are needed, follow CFEP-18.
• Build number is 0.
• A tarball (url) rather than a repo (e.g. git_url) is used in your recipe (see here for more details).
• GitHub users listed in the maintainer section have posted a comment confirming they are willing to be listed there.
• When in trouble, please check our knowledge base documentation before pinging a team.

[conda-forge-webservices]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I was trying to look for recipes to lint for you, but couldn't find any.
Please ping the 'conda-forge/core' team (using the @ notation in a comment) if you believe this is a bug.

[github-actions]

Hi! This is the staged-recipes linter and I found some lint.

It looks like some changes were made outside the recipes/ directory. To ensure everything runs smoothly, please make sure that recipes are only added to the recipes/ directory and no other files are changed.

If these changes are intentional (and you aren't submitting a recipe), please add a maintenance label to the PR.

File-specific lints and/or hints:

• README.md:
  • lints:
    • Do not edit files outside of the recipes/ directory.

[jaimergp]

cc @wolfv

[jakirkham]

@wolfv could you or someone from your team please review this PR too?

This is in addition to PR: #27648

A few folks read this example as recommended for consumption, but certain features like uploads were still disabled when they tried. So hopefully this makes it clearer what recommend. Of course we can update this when we are ready to recommend it more broadly, but maybe this should come after/with a blogpost detailing these changes and our recommendations 🙂