Add support for `after.{SolutionName}.slnx.targets` for slnx solutions

[NielsOkker]

Summary

I stumbled on PR #11535 while working on a migration from .sln to .slnx. For me it seems to make sense that the after.{SolutionName}.slnx.targets should also work as it is an exact match to my solution name (including the extension). The documentation also says that both .sln and .slnx should work https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/msbuild/customize-solution-build?view=vs-2022. I wonder why it was decided to not support the after.{SolutionName}.slnx.targets.

Background and Motivation

It seems unintuitive that the after.{SolutionName}.slnx.targets, an exact match to the solution name is not supported.

Proposed Feature

Add support after.{SolutionName}.slnx.targets instead of only the .sln variant.

Alternative Designs

No response

[MichalPavlik]

@baronfel + @surayya-MS Could you please share your thoughts?

[baronfel]

We likely won't do this.

We discussed this a lot during the time when we added support for slnx to the entire product line. In many places (including the dotnet CLI) users expressed a strong attachment to the concept of the solution, not the format of the file, driving suffix decisions like this. In their (and our!) view, the .sln in .sln.targets is expressing the intent - add these targets to any usage of a solution of any kind.

In addition, needing to support many variants of the same files expands the burden of tooling that does conversions between the two formats. Tools now need to know about all of the file types that also need to be changed/renamed when migrating a .sln to a .slnx. Since the contents of the .sln.targets file wouldn't change at all if the solution file was the older format or the new slnx format, why require any change to it at all?

[NielsOkker]

Thank you for the insight. It is unfortunate that the name of format and the name of the "intent" coincide. Still, I understand the decision and also see the similarity to the CLI, where a dotnet slnx list feels a bit weird indeed.

The only thing that remains is the incorrect documentation I linked. Any pointer to where I can fix this, or can point this out?