fix(core): added falsy check to make otel core work with browser where webpack config had process as false or null

[ravindra-dyte]

Which problem is this PR solving?

Fixes #3613

Some customers of ours are using webpack where they had set all node globals to false (https://webpack.js.org/migrate/5/), as suggested by Stack overflow responses such as https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64557638/how-to-polyfill-node-core-modules-in-webpack-5 where best voted answers suggest devs to set Node Globals as false as a fallback. Current check on process was doing a plain type check to see equality with undefined however typeof false is boolean & typeof null is object.

To ensure that OTEL works with any config having undefined/null/false, this PR was raised.

Short description of the changes

Added falsy checks while using process in browser environment to ensure that the OTEL can work with projects where webpack config has process set to false/null. Refer https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64557638/how-to-polyfill-node-core-modules-in-webpack-5 to see why process is set to false/null.

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

How Has This Been Tested?

Created a separate file to write tests. A separate file for impact testing globals would make it expandable in the future to test out other globals such as URL, and crypto. For this new Test file, replaced the globals.process in before to test the scenario.

1. Added test to see if WebTraceProvider would initialise normally when globals process is set as false.
2. Added if it would work with a custom trace/span id generator.

Before change:

(If I set globals.process to false with existing tests)

After:

Checklist:

• Followed the style guidelines of this project
• Unit tests have been added
• Documentation has been updated

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: ravindra-dyte (ca6f2fb)

[Flarna]

Could you please add add a test to verify the use case you want to support is actually fixed?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3617 (bcb6e2b) into main (1fbc828) will increase coverage by 0.39%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head bcb6e2b differs from pull request most recent head 5492ed1. Consider uploading reports for the commit 5492ed1 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3617      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.89%   94.28%   +0.39%     
==========================================
  Files         265        1     -264     
  Lines        7371      175    -7196     
  Branches     1497       39    -1458     
==========================================
- Hits         6921      165    -6756     
+ Misses        450       10     -440     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...ckages/opentelemetry-core/src/utils/environment.ts
api/src/trace/NoopTracerProvider.ts
...-instrumentation-fetch/src/enums/AttributeNames.ts
api/src/propagation/NoopTextMapPropagator.ts
...kages/otlp-exporter-base/src/platform/node/util.ts
...mental/packages/api-events/src/NoopEventEmitter.ts
api/src/baggage/utils.ts
...ackages/opentelemetry-core/src/trace/TraceState.ts
...ry-instrumentation-grpc/src/grpc-js/serverUtils.ts
.../exponential-histogram/mapping/LogarithmMapping.ts
... and 254 more

[ravindra-dyte]

Added the tests & changelog. Let me know if this would suffice @Flarna

[Flarna]

I thought more about a more direct test of getEnvWithoutDefaults() but I guess the existing one is also ok.

[ravindra-dyte]

My bad. 🤦‍♂️ I am used to auto-linting in the commit phase. Fixed the linting issues.

[pichlermarc]

Merging this as the failing tests are unrelated to this PR (#3628)