As I've seen it, the change log has been a massively positive entity. Bugs are certainly down from when it was implemented, and active developer support (with fast results!) ensures that any really bad bugs tend to have pretty short lifespans. Having a "big", mostly bugfree release (nothing but extremely minor annoyances and obscure NES compatibility issues that you will never even realize are there) would be cool, but I hope that it wouldn't lead to the death of the change log system.
I suppose that I would vote that having a stable, bugfree version is the most important thing. I won't deny that I really want to see the remaining "promised for 2.5" features and would be sad if they were massively delayed (considering that massively delayed around here seems to suggest over a year of waiting), but if a choice had to be made between those features and stability, I think I'd go for stability. I'm not so sure that it has to be a total compromise situation as I don't see the b18 thing as too far off, and I don't see why b18 couldn't be a major quest building version. I mean, if we can get it down so we're sure that the only bugs are minor annoyances that don't really limit quest makers and obscure NES compatibility issues that 1/10000 would notice, I think we'd be pretty well off.
The quest database and the main site as a whole is pretty important, but I'd bet almost any amount of money that it will never work again. I've never actually seen it work in the first place, and all my investigation into the issue seems to suggest that few have the power to fix it and that, further, those that do have no real desire to fix it yet still are 100% unwilling to turn control over to someone who is. It's too bad as it's really imperative that it works, but I just don't see any reason to think that it will. No amount of complaining seems to help either; I just don't know what should be done about this.
