feat(scopes): add new scopes

[Litarnus]

No description provided.

[cursor]

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

^{❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.}

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 15faea1. Configure here.}

[cursor]

Global user revives cleared isolation

Medium Severity

When the isolation scope has no user (including after removeUser()), mergeScopes still copies the global scope user onto the merged scope. Applying that scope can attach global user data to events that the isolation scope intentionally left anonymous.

 

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 15faea1. Configure here.}

[sentry]

Bug: The mergeScopes function performs a shallow clone of the scope, causing the span object to be shared between the original and merged scopes, which can lead to side effects.
_{Severity: LOW}

Suggested Fix

Update the Scope::__clone() method to perform a deep clone of the $span property. This will ensure that merged scopes have their own independent span instance, preventing unintended side effects if the span is mutated after the merge operation. Additionally, add a test case to verify the behavior when the isolation scope has a span.

Prompt for AI Agent

Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent. Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's
not valid.

Location: src/State/Scope.php#L124

Potential issue: The `mergeScopes()` function creates a new scope by cloning an existing
`isolationScope`. However, the `Scope::__clone()` method performs a shallow copy and
does not clone the `span` object. As a result, the new `mergedScope` and the original
`isolationScope` share the same `span` instance. If the span is mutated in one scope,
the change will unexpectedly affect the other. While the current `applyToEvent()` usage
is read-only, any future code that mutates the span after merging could lead to
incorrect trace data. This potential issue is not covered by tests, as the relevant test
case only handles scenarios where the isolation scope has no span.

_{Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.}