Hi Looking at the naming of the new rdf.web.proxy project I notice various issues of lack of convention and lack of documentation of existing conventions.
- According to undocumented conventions the project should start with platform. The rule is: whenever an org.apache.clerezza project uses the default graphs (system graph, content graph, etc) or depends on any project with a platform.* id, then this project has to have an artifact-id starting with "platform". - We should define how the subprojects should be named, just e.g. "core" or "<parent-id>.core" - when an artifact-id starts with another artifact-id this indicates some kind of relation of depnedency between the two projects, here there is no relation between rdf.web and rdf.web.proxy Cheers, reto
