Google App Engine PHP Runtime now available to everyone

This is probably going to sound a bit harsh but is adding general PHP support in 2013 newsworthy? Pretty much every &#x27;cloud&#x27; provider has provided support for PHP for years now.<p>Not only that but listing things like &quot;ability to easily read and write files from PHP&quot; and &quot;support for [..] mbstring and mcrypt&quot; as new features makes me less inclined to try App engine for any PHP work as it seems even the most basic things like writing files and mcrypt require App Engine-specific code.<p>I&#x27;d much rather just deploy to Amazon&#x27;s EC2&#x2F;Rackspace&#x2F;generic VPSs than have to add App engine specific changes to my code.

I wouldn&#x27;t host anything of importance on GAE, since Google has this odd fascination with shuttering services with zero recourse for its user-base.

Sometimes I worry. All this time I spent learning to maintain my own server, even though I am definitely a developer-first, is it wasted when PaaS are getting more common. Am I holding myself back by sticking to my own setup or am I keeping things cost- and performance efficient? Will this be an issue when I (finally) really need to scale up?

What is it that Google has with Jetbrains? First they move their Android dev to intellij, now this...?

I use GAE with python a lot. But you can&#x27;t find forum software not implemented in PHP. I wonder how easy it will be to rewire existing PHD apps for GAE?<p>One serious issue is caching gets. Those rack up your bills in no time unless you memcache stuff.<p>Interesting stuff though.

I just saw some lines from GAE for PHP and saw very inconsistent and not quite code.<p>All modules use require_once... well, well...<p>And other many issues...<p>But looks as massive code. Maybe translated automatic.

How to host PHP web application on GAE for free is explained in this tutorial. <a href="http://www.tinywall.info/2013/10/12/google-app-engine-php-windows-getting-started-hello-world-example-gae-development-deploy/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tinywall.info&#x2F;2013&#x2F;10&#x2F;12&#x2F;google-app-engine-php-wi...</a>

why not use something base of PEAR coding standards ?<p>public function foo($bar)<p>{<p><pre><code> &#x2F;&#x2F; &#x2F;&#x2F;return (bool) $bar; &#x2F;&#x2F;</code></pre> }<p>This can help: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;emacs&#x2F;</a><p><a href="http://pear.php.net/package/PHP_CodeSniffer/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;pear.php.net&#x2F;package&#x2F;PHP_CodeSniffer&#x2F;</a><p>and enable flymake php linting

Why you use multiple namespaces in single module? It is not good practise and smell. Official documentation don&#x27;t recommend this.

Please work on supporting Ruby now.

I assumed from the title that this would be about Google open-sourcing their PHP runtime.

long live php!