Add more options for AllowPackageOverwrites

[Guido]

Problem

Currently, there is only the setting "AllowPackageOverwrites" in which you can generally set whether a package can be overwritten.

However, there is no option to allow overwriting only for pre-released packages.
In our environment, we also create SNAPSHOT versions.
For example: 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT.
The SNAPSHOT version can be built as often as you like and contains the latest git version for the Softwareversion.

Solution 1 (simple)

Not only support true/false for the flag "AllowPackageOverwrites".
An enum can be used here instead of a boolean. In my case, "true | OnlyPrerelease | false" would be sufficient.

The options mean:

• true : Each package may be overwritten (as before)
• OnlyPrerelease: Only pre-release packages may be overwritten (new)
• false: No package may be overwritten (as before)

Solution 2 (User role concept)

@metallkiller had also noted that a more complex scenario should perhaps be considered.

If we add user accounts, we could also pivot and set permissions for admins and different user roles.
So the flag "AllowPackageOverwrites" depends on a user role an can be set to:

• true : Each package may be overwritten (as before)
• OnlyPrerelease: Only pre-release packages may be overwritten (new)
• false: No package may be overwritten (as before)

[seriouz]

For the time beeing I would go with Solution 1.
Later when we have Private Feeds / User with roles we have to adapt to solution 2.

[Marlon Regenhardt]

For the time beeing I would go with Solution 1. Later when we have Private Feeds / User with roles we have to adapt to solution 2.

I'm ok with that.

When set to allow, can we somehow restrict it to requiring a parameter like --force to actually be overwritten? There's a good reason overwriting an existing package is not usually possible: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/artifacts/artifacts-key-concepts?view=azure-devops
Basically, nuget packages are heavily cached on multiple levels. They are meant to be immutable.

We should probably include a warning somewhere.

[seriouz]

I like the idea of a warning, when the package has been overwritten.

[Marlon Regenhardt]

When overwriting a package, I think we should reset the download count to 0 and upload date to now, as it's technically a new package and should be treated as one. Agreed?

[Marlon Regenhardt]

It seems there are some services that allow overwriting. They use either replace=true or AllowOverwriteExistingPackages=true on a push as a guard against accidental overwriting. I suppose that's a good idea, I'd like to add that guard to BaGetter too, what do you think?

[Marlon Regenhardt]

Can I use PrereleaseOnly instead? Sounds...more direct? I'm not sure, don't have proper rational arguments here, I prefer it but will go with it if you guys have another answer.

[Marlon Regenhardt]

It seems there are some services that allow overwriting. They use either replace=true or AllowOverwriteExistingPackages=true on a push as a guard against accidental overwriting. I suppose that's a good idea, I'd like to add that guard to BaGetter too, what do you think?

If we add this guard, people upgrading to BaGetter who currently use AllowPackageOverwrites: true would experience this as a breaking change, think there are many people who use BaGet like that? I can live with this breaking change as I don't expect too many people with this use case.

Also we could add a migration guide at some point, I'm starting to suspect that BaGet might not be developed further in the future.