Currently the package 'sqlite2' provides the binary /usr/bin/sqlite, while the package 'sqlite' provides the binary /usr/bin/sqlite3.
This results in a confusing interaction, because with sqlite package installed, running sqlite results in a 'command not found' message and a suggestion to install sqlite2.
I suggest renaming the binary and manpage in sqlite2 to sqlite2, and renaming the binary and manpage provided by sqlite to sqlite.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477740
Come to think about it, do we even need sqlite2 any more? Maybe it should be dropped? Are there any dependencies in other packages or other reasons to keep old sqlite/sqlite2?
While this behaviour may be a bit confusing for users, it is consistent with what upstream does.
Check: https://sqlite.org/quickstart.html
At a shell or DOS prompt, enter: "sqlite3 test.db". This will create a new database named "test.db".
Or look at one of the downloads offered at the upstream site: https://sqlite.org/download.html I checked both the Linux and Windows precompiled binaries ("sqlite-tools" download) and in both cases the binary is named "sqlite3", not "sqlite".