Sort of, but it is underpowered.
Ok I understand, slower development.
We've stopped doing these long ago, because they are useless. Development of C::B is driven by personal interest of developers and patches provided by non-developers.
I disagree, they are useful. why would I contribute to the project that has no end date?
Yes, if C::B doesn't work for you. Please report problems you have, so we can fix them.
C::B works for me but every time I report something I get this will be solved in a nightly. there is never a real RC or a final with the fix.
We have a plan, it is just not public yet 
So there is no plan, otherwise you would have put it up somewhere.
A plan can also be made without a dead line.
Or when on the developers has inserted something new.
Last release was an year ago... But generally I agree...
A year without a new release? That is a sign.
Why? What is the rational for switching to another software just because your current software has infrequent releases?
Because the current software has not been updated in a year. this is a signal that the project is sliding into a silent death.
And also there are the nightlies, that come quite often...
You are correct, this happens very often. but I do not have the time to build and test every nightly.
Then come to the conclusion that 1 bug is fixed but I got 3 new ones.
Thank you both for responding.
It has made it clear for me that C::B is not longer what it used to be, a great editor with a great community to back it up.
I am sorry for the hard words but this how I see it, and I think there should be discussion if this is the way to go.
C::B is sliding into the position where the developers do there hobby, but nobody benefits from this.
Not the user nor the developer of having the pride that people are actually using his brilliant code.
Making a release from time to time improves the quality of the end product.
