At 15:28 3.9.2000 +0200, you wrote:
>> Now instead we're plugging in JMS as an afterthough for EJB 2.0.
>
>"instead"? Not following.

I meant that JMS as part of the architecture seems to be dragging behind.
Everyone knows about it and agrees it does neat stuff but no one quite
seems to know where to put it in good use. This is the feeling I got when I
glanced through the message bean stuff.

It's kinda odd, really. Not sure why that is. Maybe messaging is just too
mundane :)

-- Juha



Reply via email to