Make Swift Detector experimental and improve output

[Ryan Brandenburg (ryanbrandenburg)]

This detector exists but isn't getting a lot of use since it's off by default. Let's make it an experiment so it gets a bit of exercise.

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟢 Approval recommended

The only noted issue is a non-blocking documentation nit.

Review tier: Lite
Findings: None

What changed in this PR

Makes the Swift Package Manager detector experimental.

Changes:

• Implements experimental detector behavior.
• Adds lifecycle coverage.
• Updates detector documentation.

File	Summary
test/​Microsoft.ComponentDetection.Detectors.Tests/​ComponentDetectorTests.cs	Verifies Swift’s experimental status.
src/​Microsoft.ComponentDetection.Detectors/​swiftpm/​SwiftResolvedComponentDetector.cs	Changes the detector lifecycle classification.
docs/​detectors/​README.md	Documents the detector status.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[github-actions]

👋 Hi! It looks like you modified some files in the Detectors folder.
You may need to bump the detector versions if any of the following scenarios apply:

• The detector detects more or fewer components than before
• The detector generates different parent/child graph relationships than before
• The detector generates different devDependencies values than before

If none of the above scenarios apply, feel free to ignore this comment 🙂

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Multiple public constructors can make System.Text.Json deserialization of SwiftComponent fail; add serializer compatibility and a deserialization test.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review tier: Lite
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Add a serializer-compatible constructor for SwiftComponent · New

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Constructor mismatches cause compilation failures and swap the Kind and CommitHash values.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review tier: Lite
Findings: 3 · 1

Open (4)

• Update all call sites for the new required constructor argument · New
• Update remaining SwiftComponent test constructor calls · New
• Add kind to expected Swift detector components · New
• Pass the constructor arguments in the declared order · New

Resolved since last review (1)

• Add a serializer-compatible constructor for SwiftComponent

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Address the SwiftComponent serialization and public-constructor compatibility issues before approval.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 2

Open (2)

• Default constructor still breaks Swift component round-tripping · New
• Update all call sites for the new required constructor argument

Resolved since last review (3)

• Add kind to expected Swift detector components
• Update remaining SwiftComponent test constructor calls
• Pass the constructor arguments in the declared order

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

The Swift component deserialization bug and incomplete multi-package assertions remain unresolved.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Default constructor still breaks Swift component round-tripping

Resolved since last review (1)

• Update all call sites for the new required constructor argument

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Unresolved API compatibility, legacy deserialization, and detector output migration issues remain.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 2 · 1

Open (3)

• Preserve the existing SwiftComponent constructor API · New
• Experimental opt-in now drops the Swift component identity · New
• Keep older serialized Swift components usable · New

Resolved since last review (1)

• Default constructor still breaks Swift component round-tripping

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Critical detector test assertions conflict with the new SwiftComponent output.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 2

Open (2)

• Resolver tests expect a different component type · New
• Update the stale expected type in the single-package test · New

Resolved since last review (3)

• Experimental opt-in now drops the Swift component identity
• Preserve the existing SwiftComponent constructor API
• Keep older serialized Swift components usable

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

Add assertions covering DeviceKit’s emitted metadata before approval.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Resolver tests expect a different component type

Resolved since last review (1)

• Update the stale expected type in the single-package test

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

Add assertions covering DeviceKit’s repository and commit fields.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: None

Resolved since last review (1)

• Resolver tests expect a different component type

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

ArgumentException.ThrowIfNullOrWhiteSpace is unavailable on the netstandard2.0 target and prevents compilation.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Use a netstandard2.0-compatible identity check · New

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Resolve the netstandard2.0 compilation issue and add coverage for the third emitted package.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Lite
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Assert the third Swift package in the multi-package test · New

Resolved since last review (1)

• Use a netstandard2.0-compatible identity check