Ben, my concern is less about the specific schedule than it is with communication about that schedule. Schedules slip. Everybody understands that is particularly true for non-paid work. You'll notice, in fact, that my complaint was not about the fact that the schedule slipped but about the way that the port was represented as being "on-schedule" when, in fact, it appears to have slipped by nearly a month since the previous announcement.
All I ask for is updates that are clear and timely. When the schedule slips, just say, "Sorry, folks, the schedule slipped." Alpha release, production release, and upgrade scripts are all important milestones that should be clearly distinguished in schedule announcements, (as you did in your most recent post). However fluid the timeline is, people need to know the current snapshot of it in order to plan development.
As for volunteering to bug test the PG version, I'd be delighted, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. If you could let folks know when and how to volunteer for this, you'll have your (end-user) QA testers.
