I'm not sure if it clears the bar of official, but it seems to be not-unofficial. They were planning on open-sourcing a coordination server once they cleaned the code up, but then decided that there was no point in doing so due to Headscale. On top of that, one of the primary maintainers of Headscale works at Tailscale now.
Funny how Wireguard's original pitch was that it was smaller and simpler than OpenVPN or other alternatives. Now people are commercialising some complex GUI on top of it. More "features" on a steady basis. Some of them might be closed source but pay no mind. "Worse is better".
It has basically taught me how the small building blocks for Wireguard work. And how for anything remotely more difficult or multi-user I’d absolutely want something more robust handling the orchestration and management of the network. It is very hard to get right and can be very complicated to keep everything in sync. There is definitely value to what Tailscale, et al deliver.
I’m happy that I can run a simple version myself, but only after doing that can you really appreciate where the dragons be.
There are a ton of things you do in closed source “only my small team touches it” vs open source.
Even if it’s just comments, notes files and stuff like that. For example I often leave project notes in comments and address people etc.
Furthermore IDK what your gripe is about management tools popping up on top of Wireguard. That’s what Jason wanted, for one. The downstream application use cases are kept out of the secure and simple core. Two just use vanilla Wireguard if you don’t need Tailscale. Are you an OpenVPN shill?