BuildCheck NET 10.0 investments

[JanKrivanek]

Context

In net 9.0 we delivered initial preview of BuildCheck feature.

• Spec: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/blob/main/documentation/specs/BuildCheck/BuildCheck.md
• Work track: https://github.com/orgs/dotnet/projects/373

This item captures high level thinking of continuation of that work in net 10.0 - which will aim for increased adoption and improved usability based on the collected feedback and data.

Suggested areas of investments

Based on team discussion and voting we came up with following areas (in aproxiate priority order):

• [ ] Dogfooding (P'0')
  • idea: use VS feature flagging to test run BuildChecks on subset of users (even just internals) + this can be used to get perf data
• [ ] Telemetry / data collection (usage, performance and failures data collection)
• [ ] UX investments (p1)
  • UX for users
    • VS and VS Code usability and opt-in
    • CLI and VS diagnostics usability (unifying the experience with native diagnostics)
  • UX for extensibility authors
    • templates, debuggability story
• [ ] Performance (tracing, measurments, tunning; DTB and full (CI) build PoV) (P1)
• [ ] OM and API concepts (P1/P2)
  • scoping, locations
  • versioning (ability to run analyzers compiled against older V of API to be runnable in newer MSBuild)
• [ ] Built-in Rules - should be reactive on community reactions
• [ ] OM and API enriching - should be reactive mode
  • exposing of additional engine data
• [ ] Configuration V2 (P3)
  • guidelinces + guardrails
  • support for native msbuild diagnostics
  • unification with Roslyn parser?
• [ ] Localization (priority: ?)
  • here we should ask Roslyn team what was their timeline on localization
  • MSFT policy is that products should be localized
  • inbox checks localization is a P1
  • for extensibility we can take some inspiration from Tasks localization

[JanKrivanek]

Another area:

• [ ] Replay improvements.
  • ability to mount new custom checks to the replay
  • ability to specify custom editorconfig to tune the level of checking

This can possibly be considered a subitem of the UX for extensibility authors