RFC: suggested import organization: separate by network or by purpose?

[moul]

We're discussing the best way to organize imports in Gno projects. There are three main approaches under consideration:

1. Separate by purpose (e.g., p/, r/)
   This organizes imports based on module type.

2. Separate by network
   This keeps all imports together but categorizes them by the network they interact with.

3. No separation

We'd like to gather feedback and opinions to determine our preferred standard for import organization. Please share your thoughts or any other suggestions.

Related: #2510 (comment)

[notJoon]

I usually organize imports by combining styles 1 and 2. For example, if I import 'p' and 'r' from both gno demo packages and custom packages, I apply the following style:

import (
    "std"      // normal packages, as is go's convention
    "strings"

    "gno.land/p/demo/ufmt"  // gno demo packages. 'p' takes precedence over 'r'. Sorted alphabetically
    "gno.land/r/demo/users"

    "gno.land/p/foo/bar"        // custom packages are separated from demo. Same sorting order as above
    "gno.land/r/xyz/baz"
)

[thehowl]

I think we should suggest, even in gno fmt, the import separation similar to Go:

1. standard libraries
2. internal imports from project (ie. module or sub-paths of the module)
3. external imports

In each we should then divide alphabetically, which would implicitly split within the same "stanza" between p/, r/, as well as different networks.