> Currently development of new products is going faster than we can understand the qualities and limitations of those products.
This indicates a very superficial understanding of materials science. No, development of new processes and materials does not go faster than our understanding is progressing, they are progressing in lockstep.
The only thing that occasionally happens is that accelerated aging testing and lightning damage testing does not turn up issues soon enough for them not resulting in visible damage during operations. But aircraft are inspected with great regularity and such defects will almost always be noticed in time. To the best of my knowledge this particular defect has not resulted in any planes crashing.
There were some more substantial issues with early planes using composites but those were to the best of my knowledge resolved, it is of course entirely possible that as these airframes age that new issues will crop up. The main question around these is usually what was the cause, bad maintenance, bad process during application (for instance: a respray by another entity than the manufacturer) or a manufacturing error, and that in turn leads to the question of who will pay for the damage. It isn't rare for there to be additional factors involved, such as issues like these being used to pressure a manufacturer into absorbing costs or waiving cancellation fees on surplus orders.
So before jumping to conclusions about our ability to develop new materials you'd probably have to absorb a lot of information about this particular issue, it is likely a lot more complex than a superficial reading would tell.