profile
viewpoint
If you are wondering where the data of this site comes from, please visit https://api.github.com/users/mramato/events. GitMemory does not store any data, but only uses NGINX to cache data for a period of time. The idea behind GitMemory is simply to give users a better reading experience.
Matthew Amato mramato Cesium GS, Inc. Philadelphia https://cesium.com

mramato/mramato.github.io 4

My personal website

andre-nunes/cesium 3

WebGL virtual globe and map engine

mramato/cesium 1

WebGL virtual globe and map engine

rcpage3/cesium 1

WebGL virtual globe and map engine

abwood/cesium 0

WebGL virtual globe and map engine

mramato/centerCropResize 0

A small utility to take non-centered transparent icons and ensure they are cropped, centered and set to a specific size.

mramato/knex 0

A query builder for PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQLite3, designed to be flexible, portable, and fun to use.

issue commentCesiumGS/cesium

Some materials not working in iOS/Safari 15

Also, thanks for the bug reports, @alexrobin!

alexrobin

comment created time in 4 days

issue commentCesiumGS/cesium

Some materials not working in iOS/Safari 15

I can reproduce this on my own iPad Pro (10.5 inch MQDT2LL/A), but oddly enough not my iPhone Xs.

So there's a chance this is iPadOS only and not on desktop or iPhone. Can anyone else confirm?

alexrobin

comment created time in 4 days

PR opened CesiumGS/cesium

Switch from uglify to terser

terser replaced uglify as the standard minifier most projects a long time ago and Cesium has been meaning to make the switch for a while. According to CI, terser shaved about 90 seconds off of CI.

File sizes are nearly identical. terser is actually slightly larger, but only because we are now properly including the @license comments in minified code (Which is something we used to do but lost during the great ES6 switchover) so we are glad to have this back.

+26 -22

0 comment

2 changed files

pr created time in 4 days

create barnchCesiumGS/cesium

branch : terser

created branch time in 4 days

pull request commentCesiumGS/cesium

ci: Husky Upgrade from `4.3.8` to `7.0.2`

and it works in husky 4.x, so this is a regression. I'm not sure if it's because of the integration or a bug in husky 7?

yukinoda

comment created time in 6 days

pull request commentCesiumGS/cesium

ci: Husky Upgrade from `4.3.8` to `7.0.2`

  1. Go into any file and add an unused variable
  2. Try to commit using git gui
  3. Commit is accepted without husky detecting any problems.

My understanding is that this is a problem with more than just git gui but may affect other UX-based git tools as well.

yukinoda

comment created time in 6 days

issue commentCesiumGS/cesium

create a box and plane manually Cause an error

Hmm. that's still a pretty bad error we should fix (and hopefully we can do it before the next release) but I changed the label since this isn't a regression.

wzwxwc

comment created time in 13 days

issue commentCesiumGS/cesium

create a box and plane manually Cause an error

@ebogo1 @lilleyse given it's worker related, this may be a regression we should look at before the next release.

wzwxwc

comment created time in 13 days

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium-webpack-example

Revised our public CesiumJS & webpack guide

 {-  "name": "cesium-webpack-example",+  "name": "cesiumjs-webpack-tutorial",   "version": "1.0.0",-  "description": "The minimal recomended setup for an app using Cesium with Webpack.",+  "description": "Getting started with CesiumJS and Webpack.",   "main": "index.js",-  "keywords": [-    "cesium",-    "webpack",-    "example"-  ],-  "author": {-    "name": "Cesium GS, Inc.",-    "url": "https://cesium.com"-  },-  "homepage": "https://cesiumjs.org",-  "license": "Apache-2.0",-  "dependencies": {-    "cesium": "^1.63.1"+  "scripts": {+    "build": "node_modules/.bin/webpack --config webpack.config.js",+    "start": "node_modules/.bin/webpack serve --config webpack.config.js --open"   },+  "author": "Sam Rothstein",

Not sure why this comment was resolved, but please don't forget about the above.

srothst1

comment created time in 25 days

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

It's basically the same check under the hood, but much clearer that we are only doing certain things for relative paths

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

And wouldn't is("relative") be what we would want to check instead?

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

So what is the behavior for these urls in main? Do we just do nothing and return the original url? If so, then we can do the same thing here for now, but it could ultimately be masking a bug. Like should we be trying to absolutize or otherwise manipulate a opaque URL at all?

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent
PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

Yeah, that's a check we do in a bunch of places (we even have an isDataUri helper function for it)

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

Yeah, there's definitely confusion here. almost everything is an urn.. so I'm not sure what differentiates from data uri or other in is

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 getAbsoluteUri._implementation = function (relative, base, documentObject) {     base = defaultValue(documentObject.baseURI, documentObject.location.href);   } -  var baseUri = new Uri(base);-  var relativeUri = new Uri(relative);-  return relativeUri.resolve(baseUri).toString();+  var relativeUri = new URI(relative);+  if (relativeUri.is("urn")) {+    return relativeUri.toString();+  }+  var url = relativeUri.absoluteTo(base).toString();+  // URI.absoluteTo() escapes the placeholders. Undo that.+  url = url.replace(/%7B/g, "{").replace(/%7D/g, "}");

I didn't realize the specs were the only place this happens.. did you verify any sandcastles using template uris for imager work?

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 getAbsoluteUri._implementation = function (relative, base, documentObject) {     base = defaultValue(documentObject.baseURI, documentObject.location.href);   } -  var baseUri = new Uri(base);-  var relativeUri = new Uri(relative);-  return relativeUri.resolve(baseUri).toString();+  var relativeUri = new URI(relative);+  if (relativeUri.is("urn")) {+    return relativeUri.toString();+  }+  var url = relativeUri.absoluteTo(base).toString();+  // URI.absoluteTo() escapes the placeholders. Undo that.+  url = url.replace(/%7B/g, "{").replace(/%7D/g, "}");

It almost feels like this fix is in the wrong place, like the calling code is the thing that should be handling { or perhaps a specialized function like getAbsoluteTemplateStringUri.js Feels weird to just have something as generic as getAbsoluteUri embed code like this.

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 Resource.prototype.getDerivedResource = function (options) {     parseQuery(uri, resource, true, preserveQueryParameters);      // Remove the fragment as it's not sent with a request-    uri.fragment = undefined;+    uri.fragment(""); -    resource._url = uri.resolve(new Uri(getAbsoluteUri(this._url))).toString();+    if (uri.is("urn")) {

Where exactly are the urn urls coming from?

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium

Replace Uri.js with urijs npm module

 import { RequestErrorEvent } from "../../Source/Cesium.js"; import { RequestScheduler } from "../../Source/Cesium.js"; import { Resource } from "../../Source/Cesium.js"; import createCanvas from "../createCanvas.js";-import { Uri } from "../../Source/Cesium.js";+import { urijs as URI } from "../../Source/Cesium.js";

Uri makes more sense since it will significantly reduce the overall code diff.

ebogo1

comment created time in a month

PullRequestReviewEvent
PullRequestReviewEvent

Pull request review commentCesiumGS/cesium-webpack-example

Revised our public CesiumJS & webpack guide

+import * as Cesium from "../node_modules/cesium"

import * is an anti-pattern we should not use in our own code. Only import the parts of the Cesium API that you need. This helps with tree-shaking so that only the parts of Cesium you actually used get imported.

srothst1

comment created time in a month