Hello everyone, I maintain the /helium-browser-bin/ packaging, and I'm considering a rename to /helium-bin/, which I've also put forward to the community in the comments. This consideration comes as upstream Linux packaging matures [1]. When I submitted the package initially, my thinking was to append /-browser/ to avoid potential naming conflicts, but it now seems unnecessary and isn't consistent with upstream. I was hoping to get some guidance on whether a rename is reasonable in this case, and if so, how to best go about it while minimising problems for end users. My current plan is: 1. Submit the /helium-bin/ package to the AUR as normal 2. Add `conflicts=('helium-browser-bin')' to /helium-bin/ PKGBUILD to allow users to cleanly remove the old version on install 3. Push existing package to the new repo to preserve git history 4. Initiate a merge request for /helium-browser-bin/ to /helium-bin/ to preserve comments and remove the old package I would do this after the next release at the time while keeping users up to date. I've tested packaging locally with success, and impacts to users should be constrained to the package name and install paths removing the 'browser' suffix. The entry point remains `/usr/bin/helium-browser'. Questions :: - Is this the correct/preferred method? - While in between merge requests, which repo should I treat as the source of truth in the case of updates? - Anything that I've missed? Thanks very much in advance! Cheers, Sam [1]: https://github.com/imputnet/helium-linux/pull/149