'Odd NuGet cache issue; does NuGet keep track of package updates made?

I happened to get into a bit of a mess yesterday with our NuGet repository, and I've resolved it - but wanted to confirm my suspicions as to why it happened.

I did the following:

  1. Amended some files
  2. Packed the nuspec which includes these files
  3. Pushed to our NuGet repository and confirmed
  4. Confirmed that the NuGet repo had the latest version by downloading them on a dev environment
  5. The changes I'd made were not included in the update in this dev environment (realised I hadn't updated the correct files). So I packed and pushed again without incrementing the version
  6. Downloaded the nupkg on a different dev environment, still the changes were not there.
  7. Took the exact same NuGet package and placed it in a local dir, and noticed when I updated from there it did include the changes.

Question

You'll notice as part of step 4 the old (incorrect) NuGet package was downloaded onto dev environment 1. Would NuGet have known this and, due to a lack of sound versioning, cached or kept hold of this copy somehow (despite my new push) and only allowed other dev environments this version and not the newest?

NOTE: I cleared the local cache on both dev environments prior to any updates made. My question was whether this was a server-side thing or not.



Solution 1:[1]

In addition to the copy of the package that is added to the packages folder in your solution NuGet will also cache packages already used in the following directory: C:\Users\YOUR_USER\.nuget\packages. Therefore if you do not change the version after making change you will have to remove the cached version from the directory I listed above for it to get the new changes since you did not change the package version.

Solution 2:[2]

I have the similar same problem. It's seem like a old issue.

So I will clear the http cache after I update the package version.

nuget locals http-cache -clear

It will work when you update your project package version.

Sources

This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Overflow and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

Source: Stack Overflow

Solution Source
Solution 1 Kyle
Solution 2 ???