Currently, most packages follow a concern-based naming convention (e.g., authentication, logging, validation). This approach reflects architectural responsibilities rather than specific implementations and should remain the standard.
Two packages currently deviate from this convention and should be renamed:
eventbroker → eventsfilestore → files
These changes align the packages with concern-based naming rather than implementation-specific terminology. The new names better represent the broader architectural responsibility of each package and allow room for future expansion (e.g., related utilities or supporting components) without being constrained by a specific implementation detail.
Currently, most packages follow a concern-based naming convention (e.g.,
authentication,logging,validation). This approach reflects architectural responsibilities rather than specific implementations and should remain the standard.Two packages currently deviate from this convention and should be renamed:
eventbroker→eventsfilestore→filesThese changes align the packages with concern-based naming rather than implementation-specific terminology. The new names better represent the broader architectural responsibility of each package and allow room for future expansion (e.g., related utilities or supporting components) without being constrained by a specific implementation detail.