doc: Clarify supported Visual Studio versions for windows

[Prof2807]

The current documentation uses ">=" which implies that any future version of Visual Studio will work. However, VS 2026 has been shown to cause build failures on certain branches. This change explicitly lists 2022 and 2026 as the supported versions to prevent user confusion.

Fixes: #61449

[nodejs-github-bot]

Review requested:

• @nodejs/build
• @nodejs/tsc

[MikeMcC399]

I was actually waiting for the backport of

Refs: #61530
Refs: #60727

before proposing any change. At the moment the text is accurate. It needs some investigation though about future versions because Visual Studio updates are changing into in-place rather than side-by-side starting in Nov 2026.

I suggest to hold back on this PR for the moment or you can defer to me, as the author of the issue #61449 which I am still actively working on.

Also the branches where 2026 doesn't work, and are not planned to be compatible with the 2026, are covered specifically by

Refs: #61450
Refs: #61451

My tendency at the moment in any case is not to change the text, since it is currently correct. So I suggest to close this PR.

[MikeMcC399]

@Prof2807

I would appreciate it if you would remove the line

Fixes: #61449

from your PR as it would automatically close my issue #61449 although your PR does not resolve all issues for all actively supported branches mentioned in the issue.

Since there are multiple aspects for Visual Studio 2026 support that I am currently handling in multiple related PRs, some of which I have not yet submitted, because of interdependencies, it may be simpler if you just close this PR. Otherwise we will need to coordinate our submissions step by step.

If you do leave this PR open, then you will need to reformat the table you have edited, as it fails linting.

I would also suggest updating the title / commit message to something more specific, such as

"doc: supported toolchain with Visual Studio 2022 & 2026 only"

The current title would provide little information in the change logs.

[MikeMcC399]

Please note my above comments

[Prof2807]

Thanks for the feedback, Mike. I didn't realize you were already managing a coordinated set of PRs for this. I'll close this now to avoid any conflicts and let you handle it through issue #61449.