Ok, cool. This sounds good. anonymous wrote : | | A custom BL impl only used with the MC may not ever concern itself with the Properties; but the standard ones we ship w/ JBC need to be able to configure themselves via Properties. | Why doesn't the standard BL impl we ship with (there is only one) also come with a BLC subclass, could be a good example since Properties are ugly and we don't really want to promote that mechanism anyway? Why do we need to support Properties anyway, for 2.0.0 we don't need to be backward-compat ... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3979443#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...