chore(deps): update dependency mocha to v11.7.2

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Confidence
mocha (source)	11.1.0 -> 11.7.2

---

Release Notes

mochajs/mocha (mocha)

v11.7.2

Compare Source

🩹 Fixes

• fail with an informative error message on a file with a broken default import (#​5413) (b0e6135)
• load mjs files correctly (#​5429) (a947b9b)

📚 Documentation

• add banner from old site to new site, link from new to old (#​5414) (dedef11)
• add info on spies to legacy docs (#​5421) (21f5544)
• explain node import swallowing error (#​5401) (09f5b2c)
• fix links in new site (#​5416) (b2bc769)
• migrate assertion libraries wiki link to main docs (#​5442) (95f3ca8)
• migrate count assertions wiki page to docs (#​5438) (02a306c)
• migrate shared behaviours to docs-next (#​5432) (1dc4aa9)
• migrate Spies wiki page to explainers (#​5420) (cbcf007)
• Migrate tagging wiki page to docs (#​5435) (876247a)
• migrate third party reporters wiki page to docs (#​5433) (f70764c)
• migrate to global leak wiki page to docs (#​5437) (8a6fdca)
• update /next bug report link to be docs issue template (#​5424) (668cb66)

🧹 Chores

• add issue form for ⚡️ Performance (#​5406) (a908b3b)
• add test for -R import-only-loader (#​5391) (6ee5b48)
• also test Node.js 24 in CI (#​5405) (15f5980)
• bump CI to use 20.19.4, 22.18.0, 24.6.0 (#​5430) (ace5eb4)
• bump Knip to 5.61.2 (#​5394) (f3d7430)
• cleanup references of --opts (#​5402) (1096b37)
• enabled ESLint's no-unused-vars (#​5399) (d4168ae)
• move callback and object typedefs to a new types.d.ts (#​5351) (3300d21)
• rewrite base path instead of copy-pasting (#​5431) (c6c6740)
• unify caught errors as err (#​5439) (d4912e7)
• Update experimental module detection test and pin exact Node versions (#​5417) (2489090)

🤖 Automation

• deps: bump actions/checkout in the github-actions group (#​5419) (03ac2d0)

v11.7.1

Compare Source

🩹 Fixes

• always fallback to import() if require() fails (#​5384) (295c168)

🧹 Chores

• add esm loader test (#​5383) (f58e49f)

v11.7.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• use require to load esm (#​5366) (41e24a2)

v11.6.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• bump workerpool from ^6.5.1 to ^9.2.0 (#​5350) (581a3c5)

v11.5.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• bump mimimatch from ^5.1.6 to ^9.0.5 (#​5349) (a3dea85)

v11.4.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• bump diff from ^5.2.0 to ^7.0.0 (#​5348) (554d6bb)

📚 Documentation

• added CHANGELOG.md note around 11.1 yargs-parser update (#​5362) (618415d)

v11.3.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• add option to use posix exit code upon fatal signal (#​4989) (91bbf85)

📚 Documentation

• Deploy new site alongside old one (#​5360) (6c96545)
• mention explicit browser support range (#​5354) (c514c0b)
• update Node.js version requirements for 11.x (#​5329) (abf3dd9)

🧹 Chores

• remove prerelease setting in release-please config (#​5363) (8878f22)

v11.2.2

Compare Source

🩹 Fixes

• deps: update chokidar to v4 (#​5256) (8af0f1a)

📚 Documentation

• add ClientRedirects.astro (#​5324) (b88d441)
• add example/tests.html to docs-next (#​5325) (6ec5762)

v11.2.1

Compare Source

🩹 Fixes

• switch from ansi-colors to picocolors (#​5323) (7c08d09)

📚 Documentation

• fix new website typos, improve readability (#​5312) (fbceb19)

🧹 Chores

• "force" Netlify to use npm to build new site (#​5319) (3a46855)
• Fix tests (#​5320) (18699a0)

v11.2.0

Compare Source

🌟 Features

• enable reporters to show relative paths of tests (#​5292) (81ea666)

📚 Documentation

• add instructions for API docs (#​5287) (b720ec1)
• add new website using Astro Starlight (#​5246) (b1f1cb7)
• improve third-party reporter docs (#​5285) (c5a0ef5)

🧹 Chores

• enabled eslint-plugin-n (#​5280) (945d6e3)
• pin node-lts tests to 22.11.0 (#​5279) (664e1f4)
• replace fs-extra with newer fs built-ins (#​5284) (75dcf8c)

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 95.06%. Comparing base (2d54408) to head (0c4dce1).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5850   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.06%   95.06%           
=======================================
  Files         307      307           
  Lines        8031     8031           
  Branches     1627     1627           
=======================================
  Hits         7635     7635           
  Misses        396      396           

🚀 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.

[trentm]

[Marc]

I think that the lastest version for mocha would allow us to unflag it again (mochajs/mocha#5366 addresses the failures), but tests are for @opentelemetry/instrumentation are failing for Node.js v20.19.4, but works on v20.6.0 for some reason.

I understand what is happening here now.

• npm run test:esm in "packages/opentelemetry-instrumentation" fails with Node v20.19.0 and later, and with [email protected] and later.
• [email protected] is when Chengzhong's patch (feat: use require to load esm mochajs/mocha#5366) was added to have Mocha prefer trying require() to load test files (falling back to import() if that fails) when Node includes require(esm) support.
• Node v20.19.0 is when require(esm) support was unflagged (https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v20.19.0#requireesm-is-now-enabled-by-default).

So when npm run test:esm runs node --experimental-loader=./hook.mjs ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha test/node/*.test.mjs, the "EsmInstrumentation.test.mjs" file is being loaded by mocha with require(), which (in Node v20.19.0) means that the ESM loader hooks specified by --experimental-loader=./hook.mjs are NOT run, so IITM hooking doesn't happen and the tests fail.

We can manully see the tests pass by temporarily disabling require(esm) support via --no-experimental-require-module:

cd experimental/packages/opentelemetry-instrumentation
node --no-experimental-require-module --experimental-loader=./hook.mjs ../../../node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha 'test/node/*.test.mjs'

However, that isn't a good solution.

So why doesn't this fail in Node.js v22 which also has require(esm) support? The answer is that it does fail: for <22.15.0.
In Node v22.15.0 (https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v22.15.0) there was nodejs/node#55698

- [b2e44a8079] - (SEMVER-MINOR) module: implement module.registerHooks() (Joyee Cheung) #55698

IIUC, this added support for running ES module hooks for files loaded via require(esm).
While require(esm) is in Node v20, the implement module.registerHooks() change is not.

I think a solution here is to patch mocha module loading (again) to skip using require(esm) if the file has a .mjs extension. The .mjs extension is a clear signal that the file is intended to be loaded via import(). This special-casing of .mjs files already exists for another related function in mocha: https://github.com/mochajs/mocha/blob/a908b3b86604d41d5751cccfaff505d7092c114f/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js#L42-L44

This change to [email protected] fixes this test (and, I believe, any other mocha .../foo.test.mjs cases we have in the core repo):

--- ../../../node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js	2025-08-13 09:17:47
+++ ./node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js	2025-08-13 12:06:44
@@ -90,6 +90,10 @@
 // and `require.cache` effective, while allowing us to load ESM modules
 // and CJS modules in the same way.
 const requireModule = async (file, esmDecorator) => {
+  if (path.extname(file) === '.mjs') {
+    return formattedImport(file, esmDecorator);
+  }
+
   try {
     return require(file);
   } catch (err) {

I'll open a mocha PR.

[trentm]

So why doesn't this fail in Node.js v22 which also has require(esm) support? The answer is that it does fail: for <22.15.0. In Node v22.15.0 (https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v22.15.0) there was nodejs/node#55698

- [b2e44a8079] - (SEMVER-MINOR) module: implement module.registerHooks() (Joyee Cheung) #55698

This section is not completely correct. While creating a small repro-case for my mocha bug report, I found that Node v22.15.0 does not fix the smaller repro case: https://github.com/trentm/repro-mocha-11-mjs-import-hooks-issue

So there is some detail that I'm missing. I think the difference is related to my smaller repro case depending on the test file itself (test/repro.test.mjs) needing to have been hooked by the --experimental-loader ./hook.mjs loader. For the opentelemetry-js/experimental/packages/opentelemetry-instrumentation/test/EsmInstrumentation.test.mjs case, the requirement is that the files imported by EsmInstrumentation.test.mjs need to be hooked by the custom loader. So I think there is some detail in Node.js >=22.15.0 where require(some-esm-file) will run custom loader hooks on (a) files imported by "some-esm-file", but (b) not on "some-esm-file" itself.

(Side note: I don't have a good alternative answer, so this amounts to just a complaint. I don't like the pile of complexity in our testing here: mocha running TypeScript test files via a runtime loader that transpiles, with mocha having internal complex logic to second guess whether files are CommonJS or ESM. Add to that that mocha runs separate test files in the same process, so they can cross-talk.)

[pichlermarc]

New version works now. Thank you @legendecas (original PR) and @trentm (follow-up issue) for doing the heavy lifting 🎉

[opentelemetrybot]

Thank you for your contribution @renovate[bot]! 🎉 We would like to hear from you about your experience contributing to OpenTelemetry by taking a few minutes to fill out this survey.