I disagree that it is the beta testers fully at fault, sometimes also a beta tester hits the wall or a bottleneck of reachability even if it was not direct in a personal attack, but it was brought more ālightlyā, in other times it just didnāt came up and it was configurated under their normal configuration.
Iām honest but since the mwan3 introduction iāve had nothing than problems with connections and dropping connections, then kmwan came and other issues got introduced.
Slowly advanced users got kinda felt gaslighted and not always got heard correctly they just want to vote for stability as result it either got stashed for later or it got bandaided, and the community wanted more features pushed.
With other words you have two groups of people you need to keep satisfied at the same time and demand, and thats not realistic.
Also theres still kinda a backlog from sdk 3 and older bugs and newer features, like that the gl ui is still not responsive with the vlans, if you read the 2023 features topic, alot is still on their todo list or under consideration, i think its still a long overhead people tend to forget, but some of these features still come from the era of gl sdk 3.
What people sometimes also forget is that gl-inet also has a small team of developers
, i think its really a demand issue of trying to make both groups happy which does not always work if the base is not solid due the overhead still.
I mean i can relate to this, ive been programming in java alot in the past, and abstraction, also abstract rules like having stronger ruled version control, polymorphic code is really important to make the code base as extensive as possible, and when vlans was not key for this design, or custom networking then it opens the door of many more problems and it will take time to make a code design working for something it was not intended to.
^ and besides that, then they also have to port OpenWrt designs, like iptables to nfttables, i can see already a issue because iptables can wild card domains, nftables cannot.
So i can see it from both sides beta testers to developers, sometimes it should be just a: sorry, no.
But on the otherside, it can also be a marketing issue or challenge, OpenWrt is often for people with atleast a little network/tinkering skill, but the routers are advertised like normal routers, it can be also a audience issue it targets, this makes times to understand a bug also more complex and tasking and in other situations a fix got worse for other people, i still think its not wrong to have a bug tracker and a format
so this behaviour can be in more control.
For now its still a tinker router for me but thats maybe also because i go advanced 
For the wifi its just a unfortunate situation, but i donāt see it as a beta testers or devs fault perse, you cannot always forsee everything and every situation, filogic tree did not even existed then in OpenWrt i believe this name transition took place in the middle of the testingš
And theres much more going on with mediateks drivers and routers, the ax6s also have all sorts of issues but its a different chip, but it was stable for me in the past.
And yes i was beta tester
, and no im not here for personal attacks or flames, i speak for myself, maybe i donāt always agree, that doesnāt mean i appreciate the effort and hard work from gl-inet and their fellow beta testers 