I'll update the docs later today.

If it goes into nuget cache, then it will be cleaned with "paket clear-cache"

It does not right now. Do you want it to be cached there? It seems to me these are 2 slightly different use cases, i.e. you may want clear the nuget cache, but at the same time you may want to retain paket.exe cache.

In v3 we have our own cache folder. Maybe that would do
On Jan 16, 2016 2:47 PM, "kerams" [email protected] wrote:

It does not right now. Do you want it to be cached there? It seems to me
these are 2 slightly different use cases, i.e. you may want clear the nuget
cache, but at the same time you may want to retain paket.exe cache.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1400 (comment).

Alright, let me know how you want to proceed.

I think @xavierzwirtz should talk a bit about the use case so that we can optimize for that. I don't really care of the cache location

I am using paket on multiple projects, using the ProjectScaffold style build.cmd that auto updates paket. When I am working from a bandwidth constrained network, each project I build typically has to redownload the latest paket version. This can take upwards of ten minutes per.

ok so it's "just" to optimize download speed on multiple projects. I think we should go with the nuget cache then.

OK, last question. Are you fine with caching being the default or do you want to make it opt-in?

I think it should always cache and only -f flag should skip the cache. That
would be consistent with paket.exe
On Jan 17, 2016 9:21 AM, "kerams" [email protected] wrote:

OK, last question. Are you fine with caching being the default or do you
want to make it opt-in?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1400 (comment).

👍 I think it's ready to roll.

@xavierzwirtz can you please give it a try before I release it?

Shouldn't the default be the other way around, like it now is?
I mean, currently there are many users of Paket having the bootstrapper in their build script running it on some build servers, right? So in order to be sure always to have the latest stable version of Paket in the script they would have to clean the cache?

I vote for adding --cache option.

I meant the following:

• check which version is latest
• if latest is on folder take that one
• if latest is in cache then take that one
• otherwise download latest to cache and take that one
• if we can't retrieve the latest version no. then we take latest cached
  version
• if -f flag is set then we download and overwrite the cached version
  On Jan 17, 2016 2:23 PM, "Max Malook" [email protected] wrote:

Shouldn't the default be the other way around, like it now is?
I mean, currently there are many users of Paket having the bootstrapper in
their build script running it on some build servers, right? So in order to
be sure always to have the latest stable version of Paket in the script
they would have to clean the cache?

I vote for adding --cache option.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1400 (comment).

@mexx, just like forki says. The latest version is always determined by what's on github/nuget, not by looking in the cache.

• if we can't retrieve the latest version no. then we take latest cached
  version

This is not currently implemented though and I'm not sure it's really that important to be honest :).

You are right guys, I had a second look on the code, not only the PR changes, and it works as you describe. All fine.

About the

This is not currently implemented though and I'm not sure it's really that important to be honest :).

I think it actually is, it would allow to build in a complete disconnected environment.
Imagine I have all of the dependencies in my local cache and sit in an airplane, the only thing what would prevent a build would be the inability to find out whether the cached version is the latest one, right?

Yes I think we should add this, too
On Jan 18, 2016 2:41 AM, "Max Malook" [email protected] wrote:

You are right guys, I had a second look on the code, not only the PR
changes, and it works as you describe. All fine.

About the

This is not currently implemented though and I'm not sure it's really that
important to be honest :).

I think it actually is, it would allow to build in a complete disconnected
environment.
Imagine I have all of the dependencies in my local cache and sit in an
airplane, the only thing what would prevent a build would be the inability
to find out whether the cached version is the latest one, right?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1400 (comment).

I see your point. I'll check whether it would be possible to implement without redoing the work done so far.

@forki Still need me to take a look at this?

I do like @mexx idea of not needing to be online to do a version check, that has bitten me before as well.

as I said: I think should take latest cached version when it can't connect
for version check

2016-01-18 18:09 GMT 01:00 Xavier Zwirtz [email protected]:

@forki https://github.com/forki Still need me to take a look at this?

I do like @mexx https://github.com/mexx idea of not needing to be
online to do a version check, that has bitten me before as well.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1400 (comment).

This is what I have now - if the online version check fails, but there is a newer version in the cache, we'll take that one. Unfortunately, as a side effect of the changes, you cannot downgrade from a prerelease version to the latest stable unless you specify the exact version. I don't yet know how to easily avoid this, so feel free to take a look if you can come up with something.

awesome. Let's dogfood that thing for a while

👍 This fixes my issue completely. Thanks for jumping on this @kerams and @forki!