Enable CLS Compliance on Diagnostics Libraries

[tarekgh]

This change will allow the consumers of these libraries not to be forced to set CLS Compliance off.

[noahfalk]

I assume the affect of this change is that a CLSCompliant attribute at assembly scope changes from false to true (or maybe goes away if that is the default), and now other libraries that reference this one don't get compiler warnings? That sounds pretty good to me.

Are you aware of any scenario where the experience gets worse? I can't think of anything offhand.

[tarekgh]

I assume the affect of this change is that a CLSCompliant attribute at assembly scope changes from false to true (or maybe goes away if that is the default)

By default, if the CLSCompliant is not showing in the assembly, this assembly will NOT be compliant.
In our builds when specifying <CLSCompliant>false</CLSCompliant> in the csproj, this attribute will be fully removed, and the assembly will not tagged at all which make this assembly NOT compliant. But, if the csproj doesn't have <CLSCompliant>, the build manually adds <CLSCompliant>true</CLSCompliant> and making the assembly compliant. This means the change here is making the library CLS compliant. I confirmed that by checking the produced assemblies and ensuring the attribute is showing there with true value.

Are you aware of any scenario where the experience gets worse? I can't think of anything offhand.

I am not either, adding @ericstj @ViktorHofer if they can think in any broken scenario after this change. The opposite direction is the breaking one, I guess.

[ericstj]

I'm not aware of anything breaking by adding CLSCompliant(true).

[noahfalk]

👍