NuGet vs. Pulp

Whenever your projects need some packages which are available on NuGet it is easy to consume them with the help of tools such as Visual Studio, and MSBuild. We can add customized functionality to existing packages and can host them as a separate packages easily. Packages that depend on other packages are well managed by NuGet.

Incentivized

I understand that this tool may not be for everyone, but it served its purpose perfectly for us. It allows us to safely change to older repositories in case we need to roll back any changes. It has definitely reduced operational costs for us due to allowing us to safely manage our own packages without relying solely on external providers, which are not always reliable. However, it's worth mentioning that the setup/maintenance can be a little bit fiddly for some users. There's a learning curve here, but, to us, it was totally worth it.

• The built-in package explorer / manager in Visual Studio work reliably
• Integration with popular web-based repository manager is good
• Command-line options are enough even for complex use cases like publishing to private, credentials-protected repositories

Incentivized

• Incomplete download resume in case of network disruptions
• Adding user friendly platform to add and update the packages
• Package creation option in Visual Studio

Incentivized

Not really have a choice here, especially when working with .NET Framework / .NET Core. At least the built-in GUI of NuGet helps beginners get up to speed quickly. However, advanced users would be able to be more productive with Maven / Ivy thanks to the complete text-based format. Basically, people from the Java world are spoiled by a much better dependency management system.

Incentivized

• Saves a rework by sharing the common functionalities across the projects
• Helped to optimize the given package using a central repository
• Helped to make use of existing useful packages

Incentivized