I was just about to update the flickr video post on how easy it was to embed the video but instead I have to say I’m really enjoying the new release of Wordpress.
I haven’t used it enough to write a full post, which I won’t, but everything I’ve tried to do is either much easier than before or greatly improved. Like embeding that flash video, it was as simple as: clicking html, pasting, clicking visual again in the editor, finishing the post and publishing. Adding video before this was more painful than listening to Steve Gillmor talk about the “Reader Exploit” or how “wonderful Twitter” is.
I do see WP 2.5 as one of their flagship releases, even if I’m starting to be a little pessimistic about how open-source it may or may not be.
I'm a 
We started to have this conversation (regarding WP and “open source”) the other day but got cut off before we really got too far into it. Short summary - WP is most definitely open source in every sense of the word.
If I understand your concerns correctly, I think you’re referring to the contribution model, and specifically Matt’s role as the “benevolent dictator” who often vetoes stuff he doesn’t want going into the official branch and / or cuts off conversations around a particular potential change by basically weighing in with a short message to the effect of “that’s not going to happen”, even in discussions with other core commiters.
That may initially seem off-putting, and even counter to the idea of open source development (which I think is where you’re coming from - correct me if I’m wrong). However, it’s actually fairly common for most open source projects (successful ones at least) to have a person (or very small group) in that benevolent dictator role, and it’s my current belief that you actually vitally need that, especially in a project like WP.
The reason is simple: without it, discussions endlessly continue and people with strong opinions who are either unwilling or unable to accept a compromise will drag down the development process by dragging out these discussions. (see “bikeshed” discussion - an appropriate phrase, even if Matt does sometimes seem rather selective in his application of it).
One of the great things about the structure of the GPL is that it allows for a solution on both sides of such a problem. Matt, as the founder of the WP project does have the final say as to what goes into that official repository, for better or for worse. This prevents the project from getting stuck in endless debates.
On the other hand, if an issue ever comes up where he does not make the right decision, any other person / group is perfectly free to fork it and start their own line of development that incorporates their changes.
In other words, the GPL is not meant to force a particular person or maintainer to incorporate other people’s code into their branch of the project, it only insures that other people who’d like to write code and distribute it, etc. can also do so, and that those freedoms are preserved in those derivative projects.
All that being said, there have been several cases in recent memory where I (personally) feel that Matt has not made the right calls on some decisions of the project. (http://trac.wordpress.org/ticket/4254 comes to mind)
While this particular issue is certainly a minor gripe, and certainly qualifies in the “bikeshed” category, I can certainly see that it could put a sour taste in the mouth of some when they see it.
For me personally, after having been involved in the WP dev scene for quite a while now, there is a lot that I’d like to see change about WP itself. I’ve also come to realize that several of those things are unlikely to ever happen, now or in the future. As with any GPL software, this leaves me with a simple choice to make: live with the decisions or fork and maintain my own changes. Since I don’t have the time to do the latter, I’ll live with it for now and keep my eyes open for alternatives, and consider making a switch when there’s a compelling alternative. I haven’t seen one so far.