Visual Studio 2017 Editions using ConfigMgr Configuration item

This is a companion to https://mnscug.org/blogs/sherry-kissinger/416-visual-studio-editions-via-configmgr-mof-edit It *might* be a replacement for the previous mof edit; but I haven't tested this enough to make that conclusion--test yourself to see.

Issue to be resolved:  there are licensing groups at my company who are tasked with ensuring licensing compliance.  There is a significant difference between Visual Studio costs for Standard, Professional, and Enterprise.  Prior to Visual Studio 2017, that information was able to be obtained via registry keys, and a configuration.mof + import (see link above) was sufficient to obtain that information.

According to https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dmx/2017/06/13/how-to-get-visual-studio-2017-version-number-and-edition/ (looks like published date is June, 2017), that information is no longer in the registry.  There is a uservoice published --> https://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio-ide/suggestions/19026784-please-add-a-documentation-about-how-to-detect-in <--, requesting that the devs for visual studio put that back--but there's no acknowledgement that it would ever happen.

So that means that us lonely SCCM Administrators, tasked with "somehow" getting the edition information to the licensing teams at our companies have to--yet again--find a way to "make it happen", using the tools provided.  So here's "one possible way". 

This has only been tested on ONE device in a lab... so it's probably not perfect.  Supposedly, using the -legacy switch it'll also detect "old versions" installed--but I have no idea if that works or not.  Might not.

Here's how I plan on deploying this...

1)  configuration Item, Application Type.
    a) 'Detection Method", use a powershell script... this may not be universal, but currently in my lab, this location of 'vswhere.exe' is consistently in the same place.  Here's hoping it'll not change.  So the detection logic for the CI to bother to run at all would be "do you have vswhere.exe where I think it should be":

 $ErrorActionPreference = 'SilentlyContinue'
 $location = ${env:ProgramFiles(x86)}+'\Microsoft Visual Studio\Installer\vswhere.exe'
 if ([System.IO.File]::Exists($location)) {
  write-host $location
  }

    b) Setting, Discovery Script, see the --> attached <-- .ps1 file.  Compliance Rule would be just existential, any result at all.
2)  Deploy that CI in a Baseline, as 'optional'; whether or not I just send it to every box everywhere, or create a collection of machines with Visual Studio 2017 in installed software--either way should work.
3)  Once Deployed and a box with Visual Studio 2017 has run it, confirm that a sample box DOES create a root\cimv2, cm_vswhere class, and there is data inside.
4)  Enable inventory
    a) In my SCCM Console, Administration, Client Settings, right-click Default Client Settings, properties
    b) Hardware Inventory, Set Classes...
    c) Add...
    d) Connect... to "the computer you checked in step 3 above; where you confirmed there is data locally on that box in root \cimv2, cm_vswhere"  and root\cimv2
    e) find the class "cm_vswhere"  check the box, OK. OK. OK.
5) monitor
    a) on your primary site, <installed location for SCCM>\Logs, dataldr.log 
    b) It'll chat about pending adds in the log.  Once that's done, you'll see a note about how it made some views for you.  "Creating view for..."
6) Wait a day, and then look if there is any information in a view probably called something like... v_gs_cm_vswhere.  But your view might have a different name--you'll just have to look.
    a) if you're impatient, back on that box from step 3 above, do some policy refreshes.  then a hardware inventory.
5) End result, you should get information in the field "displayName0", like "Visual Studio Professional 2017", and you'll be able to make custom reports using that information.  Which should hopefully satisfy your licensing folks.

To reiterate... tested on ONE box in a lab.  Your mileage my vary.  Additional tweaks or customizations may be needed to the script.  That's why in the script I tried to add a bunch of 'write-verbose'.  If you need to figure out why something isn't working right, change the VerbosePreference to Continue, not SilentlyContinue, and run it interactively on a machine--to hopefully figure out and address any un-anticipated flaws.