>
> I think the idea is a good one, as long as it does not intend to replace
> the current (fast and easy) Peers mechanism.
>
It's not intended to replace Peers. Only to provide EJB capabilities to the
Turbine developer. That's why I'm not sure about default EJB's being
generated: all that would be possible with the default beans would be to
replicate the abilities of basic Peer operations. (Of course you get the
added features of Transaction management with EJB, but the data access would
be similar). I think people wanting to integrate EJB's might need more
specific classes generated. They could still use EJBDoclet though.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
