Mark continuwuity as stable

[nexy7574]

Description

Continuwuity got a stable release version two weeks ago, this PR updates the listing on matrix.org's website to reflect that

Related issues

Role

Maintainer of continuwuity

Timeline

Not urgent

Signoff

Please sign off your individual commits or whole pull request.

[HarHarLinks]

lgtm, we don't have clear guidelines on what to call stable or not yet.

in that interest, what qualifies a "stable" version in your eyes? i think besides "can be used in prod irl", one natural criterion could be spec compliance, for example?

[nexy7574]

in that interest, what qualifies a "stable" version in your eyes? i think besides "can be used in prod irl", one natural criterion could be spec compliance, for example?

Well, "stable" in software is really something that's up for debate in the first place, and a can of worms I'm not convinced I can reasonably answer in a GitHub comment

My personal perspective is that I am happy to recommend continuwuity in its given state as an alternative to the other implementations listed that have potentially greater maturity. I've spent my time with all the big name implementations on main, and I'd like to think that had continuwuity been an option I could've chosen from when I first dove into hosting my own Matrix homeserver, it would be one I wasn't disappointed it. Our own and even the wider Matrix community has re-enforced this, as we continue to grow in the number of known federated deployments (per etke.cc's weekly TWIMs), and continually receive kind words from users who are entirely satisfied with the software as it is.
We've also come a long way since we first started - we've fixed countless bugs, added heaps of new features, have a healthy contributor base (especially a repeat contributor base which is nice), we're respected as a viable option by several other areas in the ecosystem, and we've got bold plans with attainable pathways to achievement in the (theoretical) roadmap. What specifically made us deem 0.5.0 our "stable" release was mainly just that we have enough features, a fairly smooth onboarding experience, and few enough rough edges that we're confident people could deploy continuwuity one day and have very few complaints. Of course, no software is perfect (aforementioned debatable "stable" concept), but we're getting closer to that by the day and I don't think the "beta" label fits anymore.

Happy to follow up elsewhere if you like, give me a ping :)