On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 8:41:07 PM UTC+8, Alejandro Casanovas wrote: > > I will also want to make a claim for all those early users of App Engine > which are joining and trying to catch up the professional world using this > tool. > > It really seems abandoned to me. At least if you only (and I say here > ONLY) want to rely on PaaS and not going further. > > The majority of app engine questions in stackoverflow are from 2013 or > early and If you follow people who where actively contributing to app > engine on those days you find out they no longer answer nor they belong to > the app engine community any more. You really can't feel a big community of > people asking and getting involved in. > > It's also hard to find documentation on how to make a complete web app in > app engine. > For example, if you try to do it with Webapp2 framework (which I like the > most because of it's simplicity) you will find it really difficult to > implement oauth, sessions, rest, rbac, etc... > Webapp2 it's completely abandoned! And given that almost all app engine > examples on python rely on webapp2... that's a big flaw. >
just try golang, that is all. Java is slow to startup and very memory consuming and slow for development. PHP and Python is slow on performance. Golang is both fast for development and fast to startup and fast on performance, and it is maintained actively. > > I find out I need to move on managed VM's, because relying just on app > engine to make a complete web app It's impossible. > It's really good to learn because you didn't need to think on server > issues, etc. But once you have the know-how... better move out. > > But I'm glad to see Google answering here and catching up with the long, > long, long.. issues list. > > > On Thursday, 13 November 2014 01:44:38 UTC+1, Daniel Sturman wrote: >> >> Thanks for your candid responses. I hear your concerns loud and clear. I >> think the issues you raised all boil down to one thing: you’d like to see >> greater engagement between the App Engine team and our developer community. >> >> With regards to your specific concerns: >> >> I agree that an issue tracker is of little use if we aren’t actively >> triaging and updating it. Although I could address the individual examples >> you pointed out one by one (e.g. we partnered with SendGrid to give you a >> good alternative for sending email), I think the proper action here is to >> triage the open issues in the tracker. We have been ramping up support for >> doing this and you can expect to start seeing traction in the coming weeks. >> >> >> As we ramp back up on feature work, we’ll also resume using the group for >> outbound communications regarding releases as well as any other >> developer-facing changes. In parallel we’re having our support engineers >> monitor the group for issues and topics that need to be addressed by >> Google. These will either be answered directly by that team or will be >> routed to the proper product management and / or engineering team. >> >> -Dan >> >> VP, Engineering >> >> >> On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 1:27:33 PM UTC-8, Marcel Manz wrote: >>> >>> Hey Daniel >>> >>> I'm very happy to hear back from Google on this forum and wish to point >>> out that it has to be very important for Google to follow this group in >>> order to share updates etc. Stackoverflow is an external site which is >>> great for code fragment sharing, but it's not a great place to discuss >>> about specific technology in general which should be discussed on a Google >>> hosted Group/Forum. >>> >>> If you would follow what the other large cloud provider is doing with >>> its forum you would immediately recognize the importance of having a >>> provider <> client/developer relationship. We ourselves are supported by >>> Google Premier Support, hence we direct many questions directly to Google's >>> support staff, which so far has been able to solve most of the issues we >>> discovered. However there for sure are many developers out there who select >>> a platform, based on their own judgment on how active the provider <> >>> client/developer relationship is maintained in forums. If there is zero >>> support/feedback by the provider, those clients might opt for another cloud >>> provider without investigating further your solution. >>> >>> From a feature perspective, Google should really complete the >>> integration of PHP. Since its integration there's *the* key-service missing >>> which is DataStore. Yes, it is accessible via API's, but that's not the >>> same as the native direct datastore access we requested in: >>> >>> https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=9931 >>> >>> I'm really looking forward for Google to finally complete this >>> integration, so we can migrate additional workloads using DataStore over to >>> GAE/PHP. Many of our projects are using Datastore through Java at the >>> moment, but Java isn't the preferred language on our recent projects, which >>> more and more are done in PHP. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Marcel >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/8d341439-51b9-46a7-a6e6-8127f293428b%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
