refactor(bundlers): delegate wrappers to import-in-the-middle

[BridgeAR]

Separate wrappers for Webpack, esbuild, and Turbopack duplicate export discovery, live-binding, and CommonJS replacement behavior. Their behavior can drift from import-in-the-middle and from each other.

This delegates those contracts to import-in-the-middle's experimental bundler API. dd-trace-js still owns bundler resolution, instrumentation metadata, source-map composition, and watch-file integration.

This draft depends on nodejs/import-in-the-middle#270.

[dd-octo-sts]

Overall package size

Self size: 8.89 MB
Deduped: 9.94 MB
No deduping: 9.94 MB

Dependency sizes

| name | version | self size | total size | |------|---------|-----------|------------| | import-in-the-middle | 3.5.0 | 442.82 kB | 828.77 kB | | opentracing | 0.14.7 | 194.81 kB | 194.81 kB | | dc-polyfill | 0.1.11 | 25.74 kB | 25.74 kB |

_{🤖 This report was automatically generated by heaviest-objects-in-the-universe}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 69.52%. Comparing base (1a21dd3) to head (0fd9965).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (1a21dd3) and HEAD (0fd9965). Click for more details.

HEAD has 17 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (1a21dd3)	HEAD (0fd9965)
master-coverage	12	0
platform	1	0
llmobs	1	0
appsec	1	0
apm-integrations	1	0
test-optimization	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                Coverage Diff                                 @@
##           BridgeAR/2026-08-28-turbopack-instrumentation   #10262       +/-   ##
==================================================================================
- Coverage                                          98.71%   69.52%   -29.19%     
==================================================================================
  Files                                               1013      986       -27     
  Lines                                             160794   152589     -8205     
  Branches                                              74       26       -48     
==================================================================================
- Hits                                              158728   106092    -52636     
- Misses                                              2066    46497    +44431     

Flag	Coverage Δ
ai-guard	65.23% <71.60%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
apm-capabilities	63.74% <88.88%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
apm-integrations	?
appsec	?
debugger	69.91% <82.71%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
instrumentation	54.17% <100.00%> (-0.19%)	⬇️
llmobs	?
master-coverage	?
openfeature	66.47% <71.60%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
platform	?
profiling	66.82% <71.60%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
serverless	65.80% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
test-optimization	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[datadog-prod-us1-3]

 

✨ Unblock PR with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

❌ Your PR has failed checks. Please review the issues below and take necessary action before merging.

🚦 20 Pipeline jobs failed

Test Optimization | integration-jest (latest, node-oldest, jest.core) — ❌ 2 tests failed · 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitHub Actions

2 assertion errors in jest tests for logger instrumentation: expected 1 but got 0 at /home/runner/work/dd-trace-js/dd-trace-js/integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js:1705:20

❌ jest@latest commonJS Pino and Bunyan module loading instruments bunyan after another suite mocks it from integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js

PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/bunyan-mock-test.js
PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/z-real-logger-test.js

Test Suites: 2 passed, 2 total
Tests:       2 passed, 2 total
Snapshots:   0 total
Time:        0.579 s
Ran all test suites.
{"name":"test-logger","hostname":"runnervmlun5p","pid":5037,"level":30,"msg":"real logger after mock","time":"2026-09-09T19:43:51.088Z","v":0}

❌ jest@latest commonJS Pino and Bunyan module loading instruments pino after another suite mocks it from integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js

PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/pino-mock-test.js
PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/z-real-logger-test.js

Test Suites: 2 passed, 2 total
Tests:       2 passed, 2 total
Snapshots:   0 total
Time:        0.557 s
Ran all test suites.
{"level":30,"time":1788982939111,"pid":4807,"hostname":"runnervmlun5p","msg":"real logger after mock"}

Test Optimization | integration-jest (oldest, node-oldest, jest.core) — ❌ 2 tests failed · 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitHub Actions

2 failed tests. AssertionError: expected 0 but received 1 at /home/runner/work/dd-trace-js/dd-trace-js/integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js:1705:20

❌ jest@28.0.0 commonJS Pino and Bunyan module loading instruments bunyan after another suite mocks it from integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js

PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/bunyan-mock-test.js
PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/z-real-logger-test.js

Test Suites: 2 passed, 2 total
Tests:       2 passed, 2 total
Snapshots:   0 total
Time:        0.541 s
Ran all test suites.
{"name":"test-logger","hostname":"runnervmlun5p","pid":5012,"level":30,"msg":"real logger after mock","time":"2026-09-09T19:43:46.742Z","v":0}

❌ jest@28.0.0 commonJS Pino and Bunyan module loading instruments pino after another suite mocks it from integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js

PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/pino-mock-test.js
PASS ci-visibility/jest-mock-bypass-require/z-real-logger-test.js

Test Suites: 2 passed, 2 total
Tests:       2 passed, 2 total
Snapshots:   0 total
Time:        0.539 s
Ran all test suites.
{"level":30,"time":1788982933299,"pid":4703,"hostname":"runnervmlun5p","msg":"real logger after mock"}

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-js | benchmark: [20, 4] — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

View all 20 failed jobs.

📋 Copy fix prompt

CI on my pull request is failing. Help me find and fix the root cause of each failing job below — they were flagged as caused by changes in this PR, so focus on the diff. For each job, explain the failure and propose a fix.

Before you start, set up the Datadog software-delivery tooling so you can
query the CI data yourself:

1. Check whether you already have the Datadog software-delivery MCP tools
   (e.g. a `search_datadog_ci_pipeline_events` tool) and the `unblock-pr` skill.
2. If either is missing, STOP and ask me for permission before installing
   anything. Do not install or run anything until I have said yes.
3. Only with my explicit approval, set up the Datadog software-delivery MCP
   server and skills by following:
     https://docs.datadoghq.com/getting_started/software_delivery_mcp_tools/
   then restart so the skill is picked up.
4. If I decline, skip all of the above and work from the context below alone.

Then run /unblock-pr — it will pull the CI data itself. The job context below is what we already know.

If /unblock-pr is not available — because I declined the setup above, or it did not install — work from the context below instead.

Datadog has already classified this failure as caused by changes in this PR.
Take that as given and work the fix:

1. Locate the change. Diff this branch against its base and find the change
   that produces this error. Explain the mechanism, don't just name a file:
     git fetch origin && git diff $(git merge-base origin/BridgeAR/2026-08-28-turbopack-instrumentation HEAD)...HEAD
2. Reproduce it locally. Run the failing job's command or test before
   proposing anything.
3. Propose the smallest fix that addresses the root cause — not a workaround,
   not a broadened assertion, not a disabled or skipped test.
4. Re-run the same command to confirm, and say exactly what you ran.
5. If the failure turns out to be intermittent rather than deterministic, say
   so plainly instead of "fixing" it — that is a flaky test, and patching it
   hides the problem.

If the right move is to re-run the job rather than change code, use the job
link in the context below. For GitHub Actions: `gh run rerun <run-id> --failed`,
where the run ID is the number after `/runs/` in that URL (not the trailing
number, which is the job ID).

Branch: BridgeAR/2026-09-08-iitm-bundler-api-v2

Test Optimization | integration-jest (latest, node-oldest, jest.core)
Commit: 19efaaf64e0b50bac8b9f22d0bd60338533bc7b2
Error (code / test):
2 assertion errors in jest tests for logger instrumentation: expected 1 but got 0 at /home/runner/work/dd-trace-js/dd-trace-js/integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js:1705:20
CI job: https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/actions/runs/34396158548/job/102616285797

Test Optimization | integration-jest (oldest, node-oldest, jest.core)
Commit: 19efaaf64e0b50bac8b9f22d0bd60338533bc7b2
Error (code / test):
2 failed tests. AssertionError: expected 0 but received 1 at /home/runner/work/dd-trace-js/dd-trace-js/integration-tests/jest/jest.core.spec.js:1705:20
CI job: https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-js/actions/runs/34396158548/job/102616285482

Plus 14 more failing jobs not shown here.

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🔄 Datadog retried 4 tests - 0 passed on retry

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 69.51% (-28.68%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 0fd9965 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}