Add maintainers to the area table.

[Ivorforce]

An update over the current teams page (https://godotengine.org/teams/).

Adds the current maintainers to each team.

My workflow was the following:

• Review the list of members for each GitHub team (https://github.com/orgs/godotengine/teams)
• Add everyone who is already mentioned on the current teams page
• Write everyone else a message (some have responded and are included, some are outstanding and may be added later)

Hopefully, we'll be able to keep this list updated, since it would basically just mean going through the GH teams again.

Notes

I've omitted the handle links (see current page) on purpose. We don't want people to write individual people when they need something from a team, we want them to write the team via the listed communication channels. Linking the handles might send the wrong message.

I've also omitted team leads, since I have no up-to-date reference for who's team lead of what. I'll have to query that in a follow-up.

I've also left some comments in the page in hopes that it will keep some order in the page going forwards.

The only team where i've yet omitted some people is bugsquad, since it has some people who aren't maintainers. I'm open to suggestions on that front (for example, we could call it "Members" there instead?).

[Mickeon]

One "problem" with the current PR is that team leaders are entirely undocumented here. I'm not sure what the consensus on that was.

Linking the handles might send the wrong message.

Good call, kinda? It's a subtle deterrent, but we should really also explicitly say the "right message" at every opportunity it is appropriate to. And we already kinda do that.
I personally wouldn't mind a link to my own handle, but I get it.

The only team where i've yet omitted some people is bugsquad, since it has some people who aren't maintainers. I'm open to suggestions on that front (for example, we could call it "Members" there instead?).

Oh yeah, this is a fascinating case. There's a bunch of people I know on top of my head that aren't qualified as maintainers, but they're always happy to contribute in specific areas of expertise on the occasion, and their contributions should be acknowledged.
Although, one could see it as some sort of official endorsement beyond AUTHORS.md. Depending on how you look at it, it's not always respectful. Hmm...

[Ivorforce]

One "problem" with the current PR is that team leaders are entirely undocumented here. I'm not sure what the consensus on that was.

None that I know of. I don't think there's any documentation on who 'team leaders' are right now, besides https://godotengine.org/teams/ which i think is a bit outdated. Following up on that will definitely require some communication with maintainers.

Linking the handles might send the wrong message.

Good call, kinda? It's a subtle deterrent, but we should really also explicitly say the "right message" at every opportunity it is appropriate to. And we already kinda do that. I personally wouldn't mind a link to my own handle, but I get it.

I should note, this decision isn't set in stone. It's just my suggestion for dealing with the problem. But I'd be open to link the profiles if that becomes a consensus.

The only team where i've yet omitted some people is bugsquad, since it has some people who aren't maintainers. I'm open to suggestions on that front (for example, we could call it "Members" there instead?).

Oh yeah, this is a fascinating case. There's a bunch of people I know on top of my head that aren't qualified as maintainers, but they're always happy to contribute in specific areas of expertise on the occasion, and their contributions should be acknowledged. Although, one could see it as some sort of official endorsement beyond AUTHORS.md. Depending on how you look at it, it's not always respectful. Hmm...

It would be nice to attribute everyone, but I don't think we'll stay up to date long with that. Listing the maintainers as endorsed by the foundation is probably the best we can do.

[Mickeon]

I think it's fine as is and anything further can be discussed later?

[Ivorforce]

Thanks!