fix(vitest): add resolve.conditions to client test config

[AdrianGonz97]

closes #579

It looks like our default config broke in [email protected]. Adding resolve.conditions to the client test config seemingly fixes it (as mentioned in the related issue), though I'm unsure if it's the right fix.

cc @dominikg @manuel3108

export default defineConfig({
	// ...
	test: {
		projects: [
			{
				extends: './vite.config.ts',
				plugins: [svelteTesting()],
+				resolve: { conditions: ['browser'] },
				test: {
					name: 'client',
					environment: 'jsdom',
					clearMocks: true,
					include: ['src/**/*.svelte.{test,spec}.{js,ts}'],
					exclude: ['src/lib/server/**'],
					setupFiles: ['./vitest-setup-client.ts']
				}
			},
			{
				extends: './vite.config.ts',
				test: {
					name: 'server',
					environment: 'node',
					include: ['src/**/*.{test,spec}.{js,ts}'],
					exclude: ['src/**/*.svelte.{test,spec}.{js,ts}']
				}
			}
		]
	}
});

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 5b5d640

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
sv	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[pkg-pr-new]

Open in StackBlitz

npx https://pkg.pr.new/sveltejs/cli/sv@580

npx https://pkg.pr.new/sveltejs/cli/svelte-migrate@580

commit: 5b5d640

[iain3000]

Adding resolve.conditions to the client test config seemingly fixes it (as mentioned in the related issue), though I'm unsure if it's the right fix.

For clarity, the resolve fix was sourced from the svelte testing docs so hopefully it's at least partially correct :)

[dominikg]

we want to rework the template based on https://scottspence.com/posts/migrating-from-testing-library-svelte-to-vitest-browser-svelte

also if the output we currently do works in vitest 3.1 and breaks in 3.2 thats potentially a bug/regression in vitest. we should not have to mess with conditions anymore

[dominikg]

(the testing docs are due for an update as well, sveltejs/svelte#14243 (comment))

[manuel3108]

Should we go ahead with this or wait on the upstream fix, where @dominikg created the issue? (vitest-dev/vitest#8120)

[manuel3108]

BTW, also glad to see that vitest-ecosystem-ci failed for our run https://github.com/vitest-dev/vitest-ecosystem-ci/actions/runs/15483387187/job/43593197840

[dominikg]

i'd rather see the jsdom setup replaced with browser-mode as mentioned above, also there is https://sveltest.dev now 🥳

can't tell what other effects these missing conditions have so maybe pinning vitest to 3.1 for the time being would be the better choice.

[AdrianGonz97]

Closing in favor of #584