fix: typo bugs and other spelling fixes

[jsoref]

Fixes two typo-related bugs:

• ignoring bundled edges in the isolate reifier when assigning common properties in the tree
• propagating legacy peer deps in children when calculating place-dep.

[wraithgar]

First and foremost, this work is already important on its own. Fixing readability in comments and code is important. Thank you.

BUT. In a classic case of curb cutting, you also found two bugs while doing this. Great job. We'll have to work through what tests are failing now and why, but at this point we can assume the tests are wrong since it was a code fix that made them start failing.

[wraithgar]

Can we revert the changes in the registry mocks? Those are fixtures pulled from the registry itself.

[jsoref]

Fwiw, I think most of the test failures were me doing a not great job splitting some commits across subtrees and occasionally making last minute changes -- classic ways I mess up.

Thankfully the ci is reasonably friendly. If I could more easily run it in my forks, I wouldn't have included them in the PRs, but almost all of the ci actively suppresses itself in forks. I appreciate the concern it has for fork resources. And yes, if I really really wanted to I could have changed the CI to run in my forks, but I decided that this org wanted me to do PRs publicly, so I left things as is.

My only complaint about the failures is that I didn't immediately know to search for not ok. It'd be nice if failing tests said:

Search for not ok to identify failures.

... once at the very end. As someone who does a lot of drive-by contributing to many disparate ecosystems, this tends to be one of the things I wish everyone did a better job of instead of assuming that all users would know the proper magical search term for their specific CI tool.

[wraithgar]

My only complaint about the failures is that I didn't immediately know to search for not ok. It'd be nice if failing tests said:

Search for not ok to identify failures.

... once at the very end. As someone who does a lot of drive-by contributing to many disparate ecosystems, this tends to be one of the things I wish everyone did a better job of instead of assuming that all users would know the proper magical search term for their specific CI tool.

This is a great suggestion. Unfortunately it's not something I know how to do easily given the current testing setup. We'd either have to create a custom test script that calls the real tests, and outputs something specific on error. Or we'd have to write a custom reporter for tap. Neither of those seems very elegant or practical.

Those package.json#scripts entries are centrally managed in @npmcli/template-oss so a good place to start would be an issue there for tracking: npm/template-oss#528