@joshuagilman_1054 this is currently planned for 5.3.27 as PG-1934 (April 17) - we'll let you know if plans change!

Hi @mcascone ,

We don't have a single API method that can be used to delete all package versions from the API, but the foreach loop will do the trick!

I should add that I am doing this as the first stab at an attempt to automatically delete packages from a development feed, when the corresponding branch in github is deleted

I don't know the specifics/details of your use-case, but based on what I read, I'd recommend these guidelines:

• assuming: one GitHub repository, one project, one package you want to release
• use the same package name/group for all packages you create for this project, regardless of branch or development status
• create your "dev" packages using a prerelease version number, that has a sort of -ci.## version (assuming you use CI to build packages)
• embed the commit id and branch in your upack metadata file, for traceability
• if you want to see which branch the packages was created from using the version number alone, add a +branch metadata label to the version number for branches (don't do this for master)
• use repackaging and promotion to take your -ci packages to -rc to stable (and the desired feed)
• let retention policies automatically cleanup up the -ci packages

Hi @kichikawa_2913 ,

I think it's this way for "historic reasons" - mostly all the other feed types came later, and it seems no one ever changes these paths or noticed.

Easy enough to make it configurable, but can you share your use case? Why do you want to use something other than a single root path with all of your packages?

Anyway I added a feature for this, and we should be able to get it in the next maintenance release PG-2006

Cheers,

Steve

Hi @benjamin-soddy_9591,

No problem "resurrecting" topics! We definitely want to hear from users about feedback/feature requests.

We still haven't had anyone else ask for deprecation since this request, but I wonder if there's a better solution to solving your challenges than this feature. It sounds like you want to increase governance of your NuGet Packages, potentially with some sort of compliance in mind.

The dotnet list package --vulnerable is probably not what you want for your organization; NuGet's Built-in Vulnerability Scanning is really limited, in part because it only reports on a fraction of known package vulnerabilities (164 as of today). It also won't block packages that you deem problematic, unlike ProGet's feature.

The same is true with dotnet list package --outdated -- it's probably not what you want, because it relies on developers to have to know (1) to run the command, and (2) know what to do if there's an outdated dependency.

There are better ways to manage third-party packages (see How to Create a Package Approval Workflow for NuGet), and you'd better served knowing who's consuming outdated packages (see Use Package Consumers to Track Dependencies

Just some thoughts; like I said, we haven't had any demand for this feature, but these are proven solutions for improving governance of packages as organizations grow/expand their NuGet usage like you are.

Cheers,
Steve

Hi @kichikawa_2913 ,

The NuGet client's behavior is based on NuGet.org, where no authentication is ever required to view/download packages. As such, it doesn't pass the API key when doing those queries; instead, you can use a username of api and the password of your api key.

Based on the issue though, it sounds like ProGet is unable resolve the groups; I would use the "test privileges" function on the Tasks page to verify this. Thatw ill show you if the username can download packages or not.

The most common reason that groups aren't resolving is that the member is not directly in the group (i.e. they're in a group which is a member of the group), and you don't have recursive groups enabled; do note that this is really slow on some domains.

Cheers,
Steve

Hi @mcascone ,

Just looking at the code real quick, I suspect we have a bug where it writes out the wrong files name for the new package:
https://github.com/Inedo/upack/blob/master/src/upack/Repack.cs#L120

That's probably an easy fix, which we can do as part of this Q&A item. I'll wait to hear back about this one.

As for the error, "The underlying connection was closed: An unexpected error occurred on a send.", that sounds like it's HTTPS related. Could you attach Fiddler, or something like that, to find out what's happening under the hood? We may be able to error message to better report it if so.

Cheers,
Steve

Hi @cimen-eray1_6870 ,

Great questions; there's no problem having a second instance with ProGet Free Edition.

The relevant restriction is that you can't use a Connector in ProGet Free Edition to connect to another instance of ProGet (either another Free Edition or your paid edition).

Hopefully you can use your Maven feed as a proof of concept for implementing it in the main instance. Good luck!

Cheers,
Steve

Hi @brett-polivka,

I've added it to our Other Feed Types page, and linked this as the official discussion thread.

There's a lot of things to consider in developing a new feed type, but ultimately it all comes down to two things: (1) how much more value does this feature bring to our users, and (2) how many new licenses of ProGet would this feature sell.

The second question is where internal market research comes in, but we would love your opinion on the first question.

Here's a nice and simple way to help understand value: how much more do you suppose your company/organization would pay for this feature if it were available as a hypothetical add-on? $100/year? $1,000/year? $10,000/year? Etc. And why? What time is it saving, risk is it mitigating, etc.

The second part of the value equation is how much effort will it take, technically speaking. It's more than 15 minutes obviously, but is it 10 hours? 100 hours? Etc.

On the plus side, the package format seems to be documented pretty well. However, the registry API has a huge red flag:

The index key should be a URL to a git repository with the registry's index.

Does this mean their API is Git-based, and we'd need to first add private Git repository hosting to ProGet? And did they test it with private/authenticated Git repositories, or just their public (probably GitHub) repository?

Hi @m-webster_0049 ,

The first thing I would try is to troubleshoot this is to switch to a very basic API key like hello. That just eliminates any typos, spacing, etc.

Next, I would try specifying the API Key via X-ApiKey header (see docs) - just to see if you get a different error. It's possible there is a regression somewhere.

Best,
Steve

Hi @stefan-hakansson_8938 ,

Thanks for the additional information; so if I'm reading it correctly, it's basically a different format/style of index files?

So far as I can tell, it's been around for quite a while (2016?), but doesn't seem to be widely used or mandatory? I didn't look too deeply.

In any case, supporting one style of Debian index files is already a challenge, since we are reimplementing everything from scratch (and not using their tools). As with many package formats, the "real specs" differ a bit from the docs and can only be discovered by studying the source code and/or behavior of clients. Supporting a second format is a big investment, and doesn't make sense unless there's a compelling need (like clients deprecating old format, etc).

If you're looking to query/manipulate packages, I would suggest checking out pgutil instead:
https://github.com/Inedo/pgutil

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @stefan-hakansson_8938,

I'm not familiar with deb882 / ubuntu.sources... is that a new kind of format? Is this causing some kind of problem or issue with clients?

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @jw ,

Thanks for the detailed report; this is definitely a bug, and we'll have it fixed in the next maintenance release via PG-2975 -- planning to ship next Friday.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @parthu-reddy,

If you (the NuGet client) requests the NewtonSoft.Json-13.0.0 package, and ProGet already has that package cached , then ProGet will return the package without ever contacting NuGet.org.

However, the NuGet client will also request a list "all versions of NewtonSoft.Json when doing a package restore. I don't know why, that's just what it does.

In this case, ProGet will contact the connector (NuGet.org) and aggregate the remote/local results. If the connector is unreachable (as in the case above), ProGet will log a warning and instead return a list of "all (cached) versions of NewtonSoft.Json`... which will be probably all that's needed.

This is likely why no one has complained/noticed and jobs aren't failing.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @caterina ,

In ProGet 2024+, the Project Analyzer will give some kind of warning/error and builds 1001+ will be in an "inconclusive" state instead of "Compliant", "Warn", or "Noncompliant"

That said, ProGet 2024+ does include capabilities to auto-archive builds through use of status/pipelines, so that might be worth investigating.

Thanks,
Steve

hey @steviecoaster ,

Great idea! This will be the default starting in the next maintenance release via PG-2965

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @parthu-reddy,

This basically means that ProGet was unable to communicate with nuget.org for one reason or another. More specifically... ProGet didn't receive a timely response.

Usually it's a temporary outage or network issue, and will hopefully go away and not cause any issues.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @misael-esperanzate_5668,

Currently, ProGet uses the nexus-maven-repository-index.gz file to see what artifacts are in a Maven repository, and then downloads the files based on that. So you'll need to enable that index file by doing this, I think:
https://jfrog.com/help/r/jfrog-artifactory-documentation/maven-indexer

This only applies to Maven indexes, and that file is only used for importing/downloading a feed into ProGet. For other feed types, a different API is used.

Good news --- in an upcoming maintenance release of ProGet, we will be shifting to use the Artifactory API directly to import artifacts from a repository.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi Paddy,

Connector Filters allow/block packages by name (not version filters). The package name is FluentAssertions not FluentAssertions:>=8.0.0. So that's why it's not behaving as you expect.

Please see Dealing with Fluent Assertions License Changes in ProGet to learn more how to address this particular issue.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @itadmin_9894 ,

Can you give us a few more details of what you're trying to do? A connector filter is intended to allow or block a package by name; it does not filter out versions.

Thanks,
Steve