test(replay): Switch to explicit vitest imports

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.

[AbhiPrasad]

As per https://vitest.dev/config/#globals

By default, vitest does not provide global APIs for explicitness

I think we should follow vitest defaults here and explicitly import in the APIs that we need. This refactors our Replay SDK tests to do so.

ref #11084

This change also removes environment: 'jsdom' from the vite config in favour of explicitly adding jsdom environment via the @vitest-environment pragma to the specific test file that needs it. This should means that our non-browser tests are not polluted with jsdom globals, and that future writers have to explicitly opt-in to the behaviour.

[mydea]

Generally this is a good change IMHO, one thing I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in. It feels like we need this in most tests for replay, so I'd feel like for replay it would be OK to just have that on by default 🤔 @billyvg wdyt?

[AbhiPrasad]

I am not certain about is the explicit jsdom opt-in.

Although this is extra boilerplate, I feel like this does a good job to communicate intent, and explicitly tells users that they are not in a completely Node.js environment.

It also makes migrating away from JSDOM easier, something we should evaluate. When vitest is more stable, I'd like to move all JSDOM tests into vitest browser mode: https://vitest.dev/guide/browser/ (powered by playwright), so we never get caught with jsdom incompatibility issues again.