Leupold and Crispy,

You are perfectly right, and we all know that this is the rule of the game. We accept it.

However, the case here is a bit different because :

1. beta 2 has several times be announced as 'in a couple of days' or 'at the end of this week'
2. It was announced as a beta, not as a final release, so why not deliver early a beta ?
3. It IS ready, (at least as beta 2), since it has been submitted to the core
4. If the core suddenly decides to release an early final 1.00.01 instead of a beta 2 ; great ! - but why not say that clearly - ok guys, there's a bad news and a good news - the bad news is it will be delayed - the good news: it will be a final
5. If the intention is to release together with the next DNN core version, as a fireworks of good surprises, OK again, that's clever marketing, but it is a bit against the former strategy to separate sub projects from the core so they could have independant lifecycles.
6. I was helping with this module for localization testings (in a very modest way), but I have lost my contact.

I hope this does not give a feeling of complaint in any way. I just think that a beta 2 should be published early as a courtesy to the guys who tested beta 1 and gave a feedback. For the final release,  I think that the core team is perfectly wise to release when they think it's time. 

Crispy,

I just wanted to say thanks for your reply. It is comforting to know that even a core team member has similar experiences.

I still think that the current model mostly breeds an "us and them" or "provider and consumer" community. But at least feedback is heard and discussed and that is the truely important thing because it means there is always a very real possibility of improvement. So ... thanks for listening!

I  agree that the release dates are too slow to get a final store working within say 1 year. I suggested already to help building the store, however, it is not clear how I can contribute to this open source project except the people in the core team (who seem quite unstaffed according to the issues open and the road map in front). I would like to contribute in building the store by adding paid developers to increase developing speed if needed. But maybe this is not the idea of this open source project.

What I rather would suggest is that the core team defines the complete datamodel according to the roadmap first . In this way developers can step in and enhance the store with their own components around a solid datamodel. This will avoid mismatching datamodels and avoid spending many resources in engineering back to a DNN store. I would like to know if somebody has a data model of the entire store and/or its scripts to script in into a database to allow developers to continue their own store products.