I don't think that it is likely at this point that there are any significant changes to the underlying architecture and functionality of ASP.NET 2.0. that will affect this control. ...not impossible but highly unlikely. ASP.NET 2.0 is in RC form and has been under development for at least 3 years. It is far more likely that the underlying issues with this control (FTB) have to do with things that will not change in the final version.
I also doubt seriously that the author is waiting for the final release before addressing these bugs. I personally think that 3.0 should not have been released in it's present form. ...or at least not as 3.0. Many of us would have been very happy to help debug the control if given the chance. The fact that it was published as a full version release in its present form creates a credibility problem.
Most developers would love to provide new components to be available coincident with the release of a new environment. Being first to support a new environment after all has many obvious benefits. There are certainly many other HTML text editors out there for ASP.NET but very few purport to support 2.0. But there are obviously risks involved as well.
I applaud the effort but wish that the author had been more forthcoming about the state of the development. If I'm going to spend my time and effort debugging someone else’s product I expect at least the opportunity of informed consent. Releasing this product as a full version upgrade designed to work with the ASP.NET 2.0 means that some people may actually purchase it. This is wrong. Bill Gates did that to me and a lot of other developers in the early 90's with windows. Microsoft is a lot better at releasing highly functional software now with few bugs at least in the primary areas of functionality
Since FTB in its simplest for is after all free I expected some problems and don't mind sharing my test results. But this is clearly beta software and it should not be considered ready for prime time. This is a full featured and fairly complex control. Perhaps a better release plan would have been to:
1.
Release the product as beta to the general public
2.
Identify a few knowledgeable users and sign them up to help test.
3.
Give the beta testers a sandbox to play in and a closed forum to discuss their experience and common issues.
4.
Keep the public users well informed on the status of bugs and fixes in progress.
5.
Release the product only after full regression testing.
There will always be bugs but they would be minimal and credibility would not be tarnished. This is not an idealistic solution but simply implements best practices.
Ron Cicotte
Summer Street Systems