Barry, Per the terms: http://code.google.com/appengine/terms.html:
4.4. You may not develop multiple Applications to simulate or act as a single Application or otherwise access the Service in a manner intended to avoid incurring fees. So you're correct in that we prohibit using multiple applications acting as one if it's an attempt to dodge quota. That doesn't seem like the intention here. The quota on URLFetch is significantly lower than that of direct Data Store access. I'm curious as to why two applications are needed, however. It seems like it would introduce a lot of unnecessary work on the part of the developers to solve the requirement of building the application in two languages. On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:43 AM, Barry Hunter <[email protected]>wrote: > > 2009/11/10 Ikai L (Google) : > > > A better approach if you absolutely need to write your application using > two > > languages is to have two applications, with one application using > URLFetch > > APIs to post to the application hosting the authoritative data store. > > Doesn't the Terms preclude running two Apps, to function as a single > 'Application' ? > (primarily because splitting work into two apps could be a way to > avoid quota issues) > > > > -- Ikai Lan Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
