I thought i'd throw my hat into the ring here since I maintain a (and arguably the most popular) Chromium package. I personally think they should stay how they are. Perhaps clean up some of the packages that are horribly out-of-date (Perhaps any package not updated in the month of September or any package still on version 4.0.1xx.x or older). Linux and ArchLinux is all about choice and i think interfering this much with the AUR clouds that a bit. As i said previously, my full suggestion is to leave it how it is (cleanup old packages) and perhaps create a Chromium or Chrome page on the wiki listing a few of the recommended packages like: * chromium-snapshot - Recommended build from the Google Chromium buildbot for 32-bit. * chromium-snapshot-64 - See above, but for native 64-bit. * chromium-browser-dev - Building from source. *WARNING* downloads 900MB of sources and takes a long time to build. * chromium-continuous - Will always be up-to-date when you manually reinstall/rebuild/update the package. Also uses the Google Chrome buildbot. * google-chrome - Official dev channel package of Chrome from Google. * iron - Package of Chrome from dev channel with all the "data-mining" features removed. * chromium-browser - builds built of Chromium SVN by Ubuntu's chromium-daily PPA. Yes, i know "If it requires a wiki article to choose a package, it's probably too complicated", but... Also, the reason i haven't made my chromium-snapshot package use the 64-bit native builds is because i believe there are and will be times where i want to update the package and can't because the 32-bit and 64-bit buildbot builds don't match up (because the i386/i686 builds take a bit longer/shorter than the 64-bit builds or because there's a FTBFS on 64-bit, but not on 32-bit and so on).