MiKo_1401 relaxed for questionable CleanArchitecture naming convention

[RalfKoban]

I do not agree with the namespace separation done by projects claiming to follow the Clean architecture.
They propose to separate based on type kinds (such as controllers, interfaces, events, exceptions, classes, etc.)

In my opinion the focus is placed wrong here. Instead they should more focus on features. With the focus above the different types are placed together, so all controllers in a single namespace, all interfaces in another one, events in a different one etc.

In my opinion interfaces, events, exceptions, controllers, domain entities etc. should be separated based on the functionality.
So in case an interface defines a method that shall throw an exception or raise an event, those specific exceptions and events should be placed within the same namespace as the interface. However, the namespace should neither be named "interface", "exception" nor "event"; instead it should be named based on the functionality to accomplish.

However, some still follow the imho wrong pattern of separating by type kinds, thus MiKo_1401 should be relaxed a bit.

[RalfKoban]

@CodiumAI-Agent /review

[CodiumAI-Agent]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 3 🔵🔵🔵⚪⚪

🧪 No relevant tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Key issues to review Code Comment The comments on lines 36 and 116 question whether certain namespace types should be acceptable. It would be better to resolve these TODOs before merging to maintain clarity and avoid ambiguity in the codebase. Namespace Inclusion The addition of specific namespaces like 'API', 'Domain', 'Controllers', etc., on lines 37-41 and 117-125, which were previously removed, should be justified with clear reasoning why they are now considered non-technical, aligning with the PR's goal.