PROTEST BY LICENSEES We don't want 7.5.3-beta. We want 7.5.3-fullversion without bugs

[Jason Lee]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by CrypticGTX
People unwilling to troubleshoot a server shouldn't be running a server.

I posted my errors/configuration and spent 2 nights troubleshooting myself. At this point I believe it's SW-SOFT's responsibilty to provide a solution in a reasonable amount of time.

Did you report your bug to SWSoft ?

 

[CrypticGTX]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by Jason Lee
Did you report your bug to SWSoft ?

I made a post here... Is there a more appropriate way of communicating my infomation?

http://forum.sw-soft.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24276

 

[Jason Lee]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by CrypticGTX
I made a post here... Is there a more appropriate way of communicating my infomation?

http://forum.sw-soft.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24276

Bugs should be reported to SWSoft by emailing to [email protected] As far as I know SWSoft doesn't monitor these forums as they are for user to user support only.

 

[Whistler]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by CrypticGTX
I posted my errors/configuration and spent 2 nights troubleshooting myself. At this point I believe it's SW-SOFT's responsibilty to provide a solution in a reasonable amount of time.

This I would agree on! I think this is one of the things Sw-Soft could be much better at. They could be better at documenting and releasing bugfixes and other tweaks to the public.

;o)

 

[justyxxxx]

Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by editor
It was clear, that you are one of the user who will ignore the
rule here. It seems so, that you do not see the clear facts in
front of the eyes of the final consumer. Don't be so
egoistic.

The discussion in the thread

http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24201&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

brought it to the daylight, that you _do_not_ handle the
Plesk-System by the same way as a final consumer
does do it. Every update is done by you manually by hand.
It's a fake to publish to all the Plesk-Beginners here, that
you do not have problems with making an upgrade. And then all
the plesk-users are rushed by such fake-informations into
big big problems.

We do not speak about superbrains like you. We speak about
the final consumer who knows only the button "Updater"
onto the Plesk-System. It is the final consumer, who will
be informed, that there is a new upgrade aviable. It is then also
the final consumer who begins to trust SW-Soft, that
everything will be fine with making an upgrade from 7.5.2 to
7.5.3. And it is also the final consumer who will get the
big bad surprise: After the upgrade, many things do not work
anymore or are wrong. And here we come to the point of the points:
It is the final consumer, who run into this forum and yell
for any help, because this does not work or here is an error or
this blocks or whatever.

The normal final consumer can only be blissfully ignorant,
because he is not the expert. He is just an user who clicks on
the "upgrade"-button and everything should work then. Of course,
it is the final consumer who thinks, that he paid a lot of
money for the licences and then he can await also a normal working
upgrade. It is the final consumer who doesn't know, that to
upgrade quickly is the same alike SW-Soft will hack your Plesk-system.

SW-Soft makes it easy: They publish the 7.5.3.-upgrade-information,
wait a little bit what will be going on in this forum and behind of
all the users here they begin to flick, fix and repair behind the
hidden hand the bugs within the 7.5.3. They also give the 7.5.3
the same version-number although there are different versions
existing. Defect parts will be exchanged the whole time although
all the version-numbers are the same 7.5.3.

Or with other words:
It is the final consumer who will be faked with "7.5.3 is
a normal final release to upgrade your system", because the
truth is, that many users are just only their test-rabbits for
their beta2 or beta3.

I personally have nothing against a beta1 which is published onto
the webpage of SW-Soft. It is the total opposite: I totally agree
to have at first the beta1 and to make big tests before it will

a) become from beta1 to a _correct_ final release,

or

b) become from beta1 and to beta2 or beta3 whereas at the same time there _exist_ the big distance to the final consumer, because it is too early to call the beta as a final release.

Instead of making it clear, that the beta2 is not the final release,
SW-Soft want to save costs and money and they use the final
consumer as beta2-testers. This is not acceptable especially if
in the end there comes out, that the beta2 is hacking the
complete running Plesk-System (f.e. Horde, psa-horde, etc.).

A final release doesn't hack, because the final release knows very
well what's going on with f.e. the total new Horde-System and that
the old datas from the old Horde-System must be copied or forwarded
to the new Horde-System. And much more of such examples, look at
all the forum-postings. And the real one final release does not
use Plesk-Forumusers as test-rabbits for their "hidden" beta2 or beta3.

I can surely wait 6 months before the upgrader from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3 will
then also really be a final release. Notta a fake "final release" just
only to make many forum-users busy for days, nights, weeks to fix and
to repair the hacks of SW-Soft.

If the programmers of SW-Soft say, that they need 3 months, because
they want first check out the beta1 to beta2 and beta3 before it will
then really become a final release, I have no problem with that. I can
wait. I can wait 6 months. I have time and they programmers of SW-Soft
can also have the time by me. There is absolute no reason to make
such a hectic and to rush all the people into big techical problems
as we all can see it here with hundreds of forum-help-yellings.

Sure, Jason Lee and JLChafardet, you both do not have problems to
upgrade. And you are very active here in this forum with your ideas
and your helps. I just only do not like the bitching way like a
battlerat with unguilty angel-eyes to jump into here and to fake
other users with "Oh, I really don't know what you have. I had no
problems to upgrade to 7.5.3" and after my strong back-questions
the truth came out what was really going on:

You, Jason Lee with your "Oh, I really don't know what you
have. I had no problems to upgrade" hide it to the other
users, that you made all the updates manually by hand,
cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24201&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

You, JLChafardet with your "Oh, I really don't know what you
have. I had no problems to upgrade" hide it to the other
users, that you did not upgrade from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3, you did
that from 7.1.7 to 7.5.3 which is a big difference and
cannot be count,
cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24105&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

And me? I do not upgrade until I am 100 per cent sure, that the
7.5.3 is _really_ a final release. A final release, which is also
intelligent enough how to deal all the radical system-exchangings
alike it is with psa-horde. Just now, for the final consumer
is the upgrade from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3 a cheap lottery between bliss
and risk.

Transfer yourself into the situation of the final consumer,
who is a blonde girl, has 7.5.2 and want to upgrade to 7.5.3 by just
only clicking onto the button "upgrade" with the mouse. And then
the final release has to work as the final consumer also
paid for it. Some little bugs can always be, but not to make such
radical hacks to kill many services running onto Plesk-System. To
kill, just only because SW-Soft wants to save costs for testing
and developing a beta2 or beta3 and to use forum-users as test-
rabbits. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm just curious to know - do you have a support contract with Plesk and have you attempted to contact them regarding the issues that have arisen from this upgrade?

 

[Jason Lee]

Edit: post deleted.

 

[justyxxxx]

Re: Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by Jason Lee
Nope. I don't have a support contract and I don't have any problems with this upgrade to contact them about.

Actually - I was directing that at user name editor.

 

[editor]

Re: Re: Re: NOACK

Originally posted by Whistler
Need I say more than: Final consumers (blond or not) - should stay away from technical hosting and leave the job to professionals that actually know what they are doing!!

Then you did not read the contract about software-updates with its license.

Originally posted by Whistler
Final consumers should pay someone to manage their server (and/or customers) or leave the job to the professional hosting companies.

You missunderstand the argument with "final consumer". It is
the licensee who is the final consumer. It is the admin
himself who is licensee and therefore also the final
consumer.

Originally posted by Whistler
Plesk can't replace a good (and often expensive) system administrator.

This is a good argument. Let me explain you the big
differences:

1) I have WinXP here. WinXP informs me about a new update. I
allow WinXP to make this update. And the best one thing is:
My email-software works. http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
did the correct job.

2) I have Plesk 7.5.2 here. Plesk 7.5.2 informs me about a
new update. I allow Plesk 7.5.2 to make this update. And the
worst thing is: My email-software "horde" does not work
anymore, because it was hacked by
http://autoinstall.plesk.com/

Originally posted by Whistler
I've upgraded from 7.0.2 up to running 7.1.7 - but as usual I don't upgrade my production server until at least a couple of weeks after the initial release of a new version. I want to see what errors/bugs turn up before I decide wether to upgrade or not.

Olga K. from Plesk in Novosibirsk informed me, that the
version 7.5.4 will come in the beginning of June 2005. Or
with other words: Plesk-Users who are afraid to update from
7.5.2 to 7.5.3 (like me) must then update from 7.5.2 to
7.5.4.

And then we sit again here in this forum as next fullidiots
of test-rabbits. And we spend again day and nights with
fixing the next big bugs. Bugs of 7.5.2.-->7.5.4 or perhaps
7.5.3-->7.5.4. How many hairs will then be converted to grey
hairs? How much money will we loose then again, if we cannot
produce and must make the reparation-job of Plesk?

Miss Dr. Mayrhofer - Attorney-at-Law - is very correct with
her opinion as a lawyer, if she talks about "...commits a
breach of contract and becomes compensation requiring...".

And again: We do not speak about "bugs". What happens here
with 7.5.3 is hacking a running Plesk-System 7.5.2. It is
something like an alpha-version of 7.5.3 which is simulated
to Plesk-Users as a "very normal full release version" just
only to save costs for Plesk for their necessary beta-tests
from beta1-beta2-beta3.

 

[editor]

Re: Re: Re: NOACK

> > You, Jason Lee with your "Oh, I really don't know what you
> > have. I had no problems to upgrade" hide it to the other
> > users, that you made all the updates manually by hand,
> > cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24201&perpage=15&pagenumber=2
>
> I have NEVER had any major problems with Plesk EVER.

Cite: "...actually I download all the rpms from
http://download1.sw-soft.com/Plesk/Plesk7.5/FedoraC2/psa-7.5.3-fc2.build75050506.13.i586.rpm.tar.gz
to update Plesk on my FC3 systems..." (Jason Lee)
cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24201&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

Or with other words:
You - Jason Lee - don't login into your Plesk-System to
click on the [Updater]-Button to update from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3
which will call http://autoinstall.plesk.com/ I have nothing
against "your special ways of making updates" as you
described it before.

I have something against it, that you bluff the unguilty
Plesk-Users here with "I have NEVER had any major problems
with Plesk EVER". It makes the wrong impression to others
that everything by just only clicking with the mouse on the
[Upgrade]-Button will make a problemless update from 7.5.2
to 7.5.3. You are wrong. So bad wrong, that you let rush the
other plesk-users into big technical problems:

Plesk 7.5.2
/home/httpd/vhosts/webmail/horde/

Plesk 7.5.3
/usr/share/psa-horde/

Making an update with the auto-installer of Plesk/SW-Soft is
the same like to hack the running webmail. The older datas
from 7.5.2-webmail are not forwarded or copied to 7.5.3-webmail.

cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23850

We all are talking here only about this case with 7.5.1 or
7.5.2-->7.5.3.

Me as an editor of some magazines, you can also call me
"Paparazzi" if I will report here in this forum, which exact
status you enjoy with SW-Soft. You are recused in this
thread. Go far away, you troll.

 

[editor]

Some news:

SW-Soft made the guilty plea, that they watch this forum
because of updating-problems. They also agnized, that they
use the forumusers as "hidden beta-tester". The complete
strategy has to do with saving costs for personal. Many
programmings are done more in the direction of theory.
After it, the update-software will be published for
downloading and then SW-Soft intentionally waits for
bug-reports and forum-cryings. The alpha will become beta1,
beta2 and sometimes beta3. Are there more steps to do
because of the bad practice, then SW-Soft will include these
problems into the next higher version where it will again
start with another new alpha-version or beta-version. You
might have sometimes the feeling, that you never get any
final release here.

I personally do not know how I can solve this problem. In
the one side, I can understand SW-Soft and that they want to
minimize the costs for tests as minimum as possible. In the
other side, I think, it is irresponsible by SW-Soft to bring
Plesk-Users in such difficulties. It is not a toy what we
all do here as admins of Plesk-Servers. I feel so unsure, if
I will ever be able to update from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3 or not.
Some users here had the opinion to wait some months. But in
some months, there will be the 7.5.8. And I do not know, if
then the update from 7.5.2 to 7.5.8 will then be without any
problems. Version 7.5.4 will be published in June 2005. Then
I don't know, if I can update from 7.5.2 to 7.5.4 without
any problems.

It is dislikable for me. I wish Miss Mayrhofer and her client good
luck with sending SW-Soft the invoice for making the
repairing-job. Please keep me informed how the Court will
decide about SW-Soft and which damage-fees are acceptable.
Thank you.

 

[justyxxxx]

Editor - do you have a support contract and have you tried contacting Plesk in regard to the problems you're experiencing?

 

[Jason Lee]

Originally posted by editor
Cite: "...actually I download all the rpms from
http://download1.sw-soft.com/Plesk/Plesk7.5/FedoraC2/psa-7.5.3-fc2.build75050506.13.i586.rpm.tar.gz
to update Plesk on my FC3 systems..." (Jason Lee)
cp. http://forum.plesk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24201&perpage=15&pagenumber=2

Or with other words:
You - Jason Lee - don't login into your Plesk-System to
click on the [Updater]-Button to update from 7.5.2 to 7.5.3
which will call http://autoinstall.plesk.com/ I have nothing
against "your special ways of making updates" as you
described it before.

I have something against it, that you bluff the unguilty
Plesk-Users here with "I have NEVER had any major problems
with Plesk EVER". It makes the wrong impression to others
that everything by just only clicking with the mouse on the
[Upgrade]-Button will make a problemless update from 7.5.2
to 7.5.3. You are wrong. So bad wrong, that you let rush the
other plesk-users into big technical problems:

When you read my posts do you conveniently forget parts of my posts? I stated before and will state again. Before the upgrade to 7.5.3 I ALWAYS used the auto updater button in the control panel with NO major problems (in fact only two minor problems that I was able to fix in a matter of minutes).

Also you might want to read through the End User Agreement:

6. Disclaimer

THE SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION ARE LICENSED AS IS, AND SWSOFT DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY LAW. WITHOUT LIMITATION OF THE FOREGOING, SWSOFT EXPRESSLY DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT OPERATION OF THE SOFTWARE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE. YOU ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR SELECTING THE SOFTWARE TO ACHIEVE YOUR INTENDED RESULTS, AND FOR THE RESULTS OBTAINED FROM YOUR USE OF THE SOFTWARE. YOU SHALL BEAR THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SOFTWARE.

Also Editor, since your an editor you probably already know that its illegal to publicly defame someone. So DO NOT defame me by saying that I bluff and lie to users here about not having problems with Plesk. I personally hope a moderater will come and put this thread out of its missery as its not productive at all and is just you bashing (defaming) SWSoft and now me.

If you have such a big problem with Plesk because you are not a real server admin and rely on Plesk to run your server then leave or find someone else to administer the server for you. Not all server admins cost a fortune. I myself charge customers $25 USD/hour to administer servers (Plesk or not) for them. Any control pannel wether it be Cpannel, Plesk or whatever will have bugs. Plesk is IMO the most stable I've seen out there. They are not replacements for

Hopefully a forum moderater will drop by and put this thread out of its missery because it doesn't server any purpose but to cause trouble.

PS:

2) I have Plesk 7.5.2 here. Plesk 7.5.2 informs me about a
new update. I allow Plesk 7.5.2 to make this update. And the
worst thing is: My email-software "horde" does not work
anymore, because it was hacked by
http://autoinstall.plesk.com/

It wasn't hacked it was updated. Two tottally different actions. I thought you said you were an editor? why would you make a mistake like that and missrepresent the truth? I guess thats why your an editor for a magazine and not a newspaper (something that tells the truth without blowing it out of proportion)

 

[justyxxxx]

I agree Jason - his post isn't contibuting to anything. As you mentioned, I seriously doubt his editing job, but if he is one, then pity the publication(s).

Editor, use your editor skills and read the license agreement:

http://www.sw-soft.com/en/company/terms/

Then, I suggest you get a support contract:

http://www.sw-soft.com/en/support/plesk/

Or, if you prefer, you can go to Windows and pay even more for support:

http://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?ln=en-us&prid=5825&gprid=36988

And let's not forget, that if you run Red Hat Linux, then consider a RedHat support agreement:

https://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/compare/server/

So basically, let me summarize this for you - stop your damn whining about Plesk not replying to posts here and start paying for support that is reasonably priced. In addition, you registered in May 2005 and just how many updates and testing with Plesk can you possibly have done? Many of us have been here for years and while I agree totally that updates and products should be tested thoroughly, not all problems can be found. Some, you will find yourself. And the product is awesome. It runs very well for my company and I have thousands of customers.

And, of course SWSoft monitors the forum. What company wouldn't monitor a forum? Just because they don't post very often, doesn't mean they're not listening or taking notes in order to correct issues.

So, why don't you shut your hole or switch to something else. Do us all a favor and return this forum back to a peaceful, problem solving forum instead of a corner for a whining, sniffling, editor-wannabe on a crusade to nowhere.

 

[editor]

Originally posted by Jason Lee
It wasn't hacked it was updated.

Say the Judges to the defendant: "So, why did you hack?"
Reply by the defendant: "I did not hack. I only updated."

 

[justyxxxx]

Originally posted by editor
Say the Judges to the defendant: "So, why did you hack?"
Reply by the defendant: "I did not hack. I only updated."

You know, I wouldn't have a problem with your posts if it wasn't for the fact that you're talking lawsuits and expecting free support after your purchase. And that's what it sounds like you're doing. You should've been aware of the support options before you purchased the product (by either reading or checking on them). In addition, in my opinion, talking lawsuits and other lawyer BS isn't forwarding your cause at all.

Many of us have experienced some problems with Plesk upgrades. Sometimes those problems are simple and once or twice they were pretty bad, and very frustrating. That is true and so I agree with you that they should test as much as possible before releasing upgrades.

But, to act like they should be on here offering free support posts when you know they, like many other companies, have different pay-for-support options (such as this free forum for users to share information), but on top of that be discussing and apparently supporting lawsuits . . . then you're headed down the wrong path and not one that I'm willing to take with you.

 

[exothermic]

Originally posted by Cranky



There is a simple solution to this ... if SWsoft want to release a product which YOU don't feel is right for your business you need to hang back for a later release in the 7.5.x tree. If you don't like this you can install Plesk with the bugs that exist - bugs which do not affect my business despite running in excess of 100 Plesk systems, and providing 3rd party plesk technical assistance to more.
[/B]

I haven't read this entire thread, but I think there is one very important theme that is missed. You seem to hint that simply waiting on future releases will solve bug problems, but that is completely unfounded by the way they release software.

Most Software is released with a version x.0 which has a list of core features. Beta tests are done on it, but in the early stages x.1, x.2 etc, you can expect it to fairly green. In a typical project there would be a feature freeze, and the version would develop with bug fixes, and the later series, x,7, or x.20. would be more bug free.

Now with sw-soft it seems that they release a major version 7, 7.5 etc, but durring the development of the release they keep adding pretty substancial features, which incure more bugs. At this rate there is no hope of getting a later release that will be logically more inclined to be more bug free. We can hope and see if luck paid off. Sure their subsequent releases squash bugs, but that is hardly helpfully if they just incure more bugs.

that being said I haven't incured very many problems with the software itself, and they do a good job. But it should be plainly obvious that there are some issues that need to be dealt with, the main one being, having a disclosed list of bugs for each version, as they appear, so that the user can make an educated choice as to when to upgrade.

Personally I'm not upgrading to 7.5.3, since I don't have the time to play with it if something goes wrong, but I don't have faith that 7.5.4 will be any better either. I believe they will fix the bugs in 7.5.3, but I also believe they will impliment new features which will incure more bugs. I just sit back and watch all the guinea pigs here have a go at and make my descision from that.

What I really think is needed here is one of two things:

1.) two releases, one that simply fixes the bugs of the last release, and one that keeps on doing what they are doign.

2.) Release a version, that is a feature release, and then only perform bug/security fixes on that release, while at the same time work on the next release, with the new features.

Anyway that is just my two sense, we are just all tired of it. I have seen this issue not only in plesk but a number of other sw-softs products, such as HSPcomplete 3.2 release was just an appologiy for their 3.1 release.


my two cents

 

[Cranky]

Originally posted by exothermic
I haven't read this entire thread, but I think there is one very important theme that is missed. You seem to hint that simply waiting on future releases will solve bug problems, but that is completely unfounded by the way they release software.

That's not particularly correct though ... sure 7.5.3 has a lot of new features which weren't there earlier, and that's becoming a lot more common now with Plesk, but if you think back to 7.1.x tree by the time they reached v7.1.7 the software is of an excellent quality IMHO. I don't follow Plesk 7.1 forums any longer, but I'd imagine that the number of bugs in the software is low as they had time to work out all the bugs (adding new features in the meantime, sure) and stabilise the software for the final (probably) release of the tree.

A feature freeze may be a good idea, but in reality it's unlikely to happen as that allows marketing to keep up promoting Plesk and its constant new features ... but I do agree with your thoughts about a bugfix and a new-feature tree being separate - but I guess it could be argued that 7.1.7 is the end of the most current bugfix tree and 7.5.3 is the latest of the new feature tree which they'll feature-freeze before committing to bugfixed status?

 

[Cranky]

There's a lot of people using 7.1.7, and in general they have the least problems because they waited until 7.1.6/7.1.7 or thereabouts before upgrading from 7.0.4. My suggestion is that people looking for stable and bugfree (almost) software use that for now, then upgrade to 7.5.7 when available.

 

[exothermic]

Yes I can agree that the old 7.1.7 is fairly stable.

What really has me confused is that I haven't seen a major project, keep pushing out feature releases without first addressing the bugs in the previous release with a bug/security release.

Isn't this pretty much the industry standard for developing software? (aside from MS of course), but projects like php, mysql, etc. It just seems to make the most sense.

The other problem with this is. What happens is a bug in 7.1.7 is discovered? I'm pretty sure the chances of it being fixed with another 7.1.x release is next to none.

I'm pretty sure their response would go something like this:

"Well you could just upgrade to our newest version"

I think it is a great product, but their release logic/schedual is fundamentaly flawed.

All you guys out there whinning about 7.5.3 being beta, well do like cranky says, don't upgrade. Do you really at this point need someone to label a release for you, if you want to try it out then go for, if not then don't. It is pretty obvious at this point from the forum, what the stability of this release is.

Point and click doesnt' usually go along side bleeding edge. So if you don't know how to move beyond your mouse, then don't expect much either. I don't think I've seen many bugs so far that half a day on the comand line couldn't fix.

Cranky you have to agree that the process in which they release software, is a major problem. You can't fall back on the 7.1.7 is stable stance here since, if there was a major bug/security flaw discovered, it is unlikely that there would be a 7.1.x solution.

We can all just cross our fingers and hope that the later versions are stable, and no more bugs crop up especially once the new version is started.

 

[Cranky]

Originally posted by exothermic
Cranky you have to agree that the process in which they release software, is a major problem. You can't fall back on the 7.1.7 is stable stance here since, if there was a major bug/security flaw discovered, it is unlikely that there would be a 7.1.x solution.

We can all just cross our fingers and hope that the later versions are stable, and no more bugs crop up especially once the new version is started.

I can see your point, I definately can, but I still think that 7.1.7's for those demanding stable releases, and 7.5.3 for those putting features before stability. I do agree that bugfixes should be ported back to 7.1.x and so far they have been - even some features like DNS ACL transfers and psadump/psarestore improvements, and a PHP security fix.

Sure, they're going to be more committed to the new release as that's what their marketing/sales teams demand, but in reality I don't see an issue with 7.1.x as it's not reached EOL and will be maintained. If this isn't the case I completely agree with you ... it should be, and needs to be, but IMHO so far it has been.