I was just discussing this very point with someone today. Firebase and Channel are not equivalent, which is why Google appears to be pushing this API change. Otherwise what is the point of having API, if implementation details cannot be addressed seamlessly?
On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 5:27:39 PM UTC-4, Nick wrote: > > It would be great if google could provide a porting guide at the least. > > I also agree that once you got them working they're great, wasn't so happy > to hear they're out the window. Why couldn't you just move the > infrastructure underneath to share firebase tech instead of gtalk and leave > it integrated to the platform? > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/e95a84e5-fb4d-4968-a5bd-1480044cac69%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
