"bela(a)jboss.com" wrote : I don't like this approach, as it defeats the uniformity of byte code instrumentation. I always disliked that - although we do instrument user classes - we cannot do the same for collections, so that's where we use AOP proxies. | I'd prefer a uniform approach. Having to writter getters and setters in one case and being able to use complete POJOs in another is cumbersome IMO. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this, to be honest, my initial reaction to this request was pretty much the same. I agree that the AOP approach is better. I also don't like introducing confusion, and I have a feeling that having to reget proxy objects after they are attached will do exactly that. However, if there is enough community demand for this, especially enough that someone is willing to submit the code to do it, provided the final patch looks good, and doesn't over complicate the code base, I'm ok with making some kind of option for it. -Jason View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4092227#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...