stack wrote: > You have a default constructor in your filter? Want to paste code into > an issue and describe how to the manufacture the issue so others can > share your pain? > St.Ack
Stack, Clint thanks guys! Works like a charm :) Yeah, I missed a default constructor. Those swallowed exceptions misled me. I should have looked at the sources. I suppose a local instance is created by my non-default constructor and remote is deserialized, but instantiated by newInstance so actually by that missing constructor I didn't have. Przemek -- SubRecord - Enterprise Aspects Stack http://subrecord.org
