...its wishful thinking I know :/ Once things are in the get enhanced\polished at a snails pace (if ever). For example i've been waiting to have multiple template support in the download list since day 1, and bring it up every beta pre-release.
Vassil has a blog post
asking when is a feature really done. I replied to him directly with almost your exact post about the 80-90% done then forgotten. There's rarely polish before we're onto the next thing.
I'm all for increasing sales by feature matching\beating everyone else, but us guys\gals who have to work with the current buggy\feature missing 700 outstanding PITS issue CMS are going stir crazy! I know the roadmaps dont have 100% of the things we get on release, and 5.2 is only a few months out, but I had a partial meltdown when I saw the features coming, while I'm sitting here with 8 custom module builder modules whos content can't be filtered by taxon, sorted in the UI, unable to edit trivial basic label data on the fields, etc etc...but here comes content personalization...great.
Someone else put out a post that I agreed with this week echoing the same thing. I can't work with it for a day without some new roadblock or strange bug. I'm working on 3 projects at the same time, ENT, Std, SBE, and I feel like I'm abusing the poor support guys (thanks much btw if you're reading this)....but what choice to I have. I refuse to "hack" stuff in with blog post fixes. Look if someone took the time to write up a fix and post it, why not just fix it in the codebase for the next release. I find once things have hacky workarounds (mapping external templates, etc etc) then there's less or no incentive to actually fix the thing and it exposes me to new release YSODs b/c the hack doesn't have a unit test on their end.
Hell, today I actually submitted a fix for a PITS issue which should be accepted into 5.2 because I was tired of waiting for it to never be fixed.
Blah blah rant over...just give us a custom field page UI please.