As mentioned in the Arch Packaging Standards [1]: /usr/share/doc/{pkg} Application documentation You should rename the documentation folder of your packages to /usr/share/doc/$pkgname, so there would be not anymore conflict. As for the use-case one, maybe a user would not USE them both, but he may be using two other packages that depends the two at the same time :) [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards Felix Yan Twitter: @felixonmars Wiki: http://felixc.at On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@gmail.com> wrote:

Was just trying out some python packages and I realized I can't have both the python and python2 variants installed at the same time for python-networkx.

Of course, there's conflicts with the license files and perhaps documentation, but other than that I wonder whether there's a use-case for having both installed (I'm in an academic setting, and I use both python3 and python2).

Should I simply custom-PKGBUILD such issues or does it make sense to have, for example:- 1. python-foo provides all files shared between python3 and python2 variants 2. python2-foo depends on python-foo ?

On 16 October 2012 16:48, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@gmail.com> wrote:

python-foo and python2-foo - should they conflict?

Absolutely not. At least, ideally. I may work with both Python versions and in that case will need libraries for each. Shared files have been a problem, and so far the (painful) route is to split them into a -common package (since upstream does not care to handle such inconveniences). See pyqt for an example. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1