doc: improve onboarding extras formatting

[Fishrock123]

Checklist

• documentation is changed or added
• the commit message follows commit guidelines

Affected core subsystem(s)

doc,meta

Description of change

Fixes some formatting, improves some formatting, updates minor nits.

I guess we should at some point do a call for who wants to be on the chart.

[jasnell]

Two stray commits in here?

[jasnell]

Would much prefer to make these all team references and begin moving away from specific individuals. Doing so has worked effectively for things like lts, documentation, streams, http, and crypto. For instance, I've created a @nodejs/buffer team as an example.

The downside to mentioning specific individuals is that it creates a disincentive for new collaborators to feel empowered to jump in and help with the reviews and puts too much emphasis and burden on specific individuals.

[Fishrock123]

For some areas, yes.

For other parts of core, I think this is still correct until the knowledge becomes more distilled and distributed as more people learn the codebase, and while that is something we should work towards it doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

[jasnell]

Having those teams be initially made up of the people listed here would meet the same objective, no?

Also, this should also list:

• doc - @nodejs/documentation
• anything LTS - @nodejs/lts

[Fishrock123]

@jasnell Will add those, could you come up with a better LTS description?

[evanlucas]

I like the team approach, but do also see your pov @Fishrock123. I think we should definitely try to move towards having a team for each subsystem eventually.

[Trott]

You can remove my name from testing as I'm on nodejs/testing and that's what people should be using IMO.

[Fishrock123]

No, but I did have a stray commit in master which is why the base is now incorrect here, fixing.

[Fishrock123]

This was mostly to fix the formatting.. can we land this and then PR any additions after?

I'm accepting, and had already previously accepted the list was not complete and we should probably get the collaborators to to fill it out more. It's designed to be a baseline guide for those new to the project to be able to CC at least some people. :)

Also, perhaps it should be in one of the other documents, I'm not quite sure!

[evanlucas]

LGTM

[jasnell]

No objections, just want to make sure it's not left undone.

[Fishrock123]

fffff this has that stupid qs module readme change in it somehow again ugh

[Fishrock123]

@jasnell lgty?

[jasnell]

Looks fine.

[benjamingr]

LGTM

[mscdex]

FWIW explicitly mentioning me for lib/_http* isn't necessary since I am already in the @nodejs/http team.