Oy, this is my fault for fanning the flames. I apologize for letting this topic catch fire in the wrong places. Before we go into more name calling: Vivek has been an App Engine developer for a while, almost from the beginning, while Jeff maintains one of the most popular Java libraries for GAE - Objectify - and trust me when I say that he *does* know what he is talking about.
My statement called into question the assertion that PHP was what App Engine needed. While the long term, we-could-do-this-if-we-had-infinite-resources goal is certainly to support EVERY language conceivable to man on App Engine, this is probably something that Google will not do in the near term timeframe. More developers does not translate into a sustainable pricing strategy. Believe it or not, not everything gets cheaper just because you have more users. Some things actually get more expensive. Official support for PHP is one of these things. App Engine was an internal tool before it was an external one. We launched Python because we understand it. We launched Java because we understand it, and there is a huge userbase. Some Java users expected to be able to port their knowledge of Spring/JSF/Wicket/etc immediately over to App Engine without having to learn anything new. I think we set the expectations incorrectly here. The plan that is in place will be very close to what we launch with, because when we looked at different pricing plans, our analysis of previous usage trends and billing led us to believe that the one we have announced was the most balanced in terms of being developer friendly as well as sustainable. Unfortunately, we did understand that the changes would not work for some people. The most constructive discussion we can have right now is around how we can make this pricing work. What tools can we provide? What data do we not display? How should support work? And so forth. Throttler knobs, for instance, are an example of a feature where much of the requirements were sourced from constructive user feedback. Raising the priority of Python concurrency was another one. To answer the JDO question: have you tried comment #13? Seems to resolve the issue: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4834#c13 Ikai Lan Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine Blog: http://googleappengine.blogspot.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/app_engine Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Branko Vukelic <bg.bra...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Jeff Schnitzer <j...@infohazard.org> > wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:14 AM, vivpuri <v...@vivekpuri.com> wrote: > >> @Jeff i dont you have the development experience on AppEngine to even > >> take part on this discussion. Before suggesting, first go an check > >> what Quercus does and can enable you to do on AppEngine. > > > > This is the stupidest thing anyone has said to me in years. > > And more to come if you keep replying to him. :) > > -- > Branko Vukelić > bra...@herdhound.com > > Lead Developer > Herd Hound (tm) - Travel that doesn't bite > www.herdhound.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
