Production readiness: complete language bindings and packaging

[aepfli]

Summary

The repository has a solid multi-language strategy and several mature bindings already, but packaging, publishing, and documentation readiness are uneven across languages, especially for JavaScript and .NET.

What already looks good

• Strong top-level docs in README.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, and BENCHMARKS.md
• Good maturity in the Rust core, Go, Java, and Python surfaces
• CI already exercises multiple language bindings and shared WASM packaging paths

Production gaps to address

• Complete JavaScript package readiness in js/ (README, package metadata, build output, publishability)
• Complete .NET package readiness in dotnet/ (NuGet metadata, packaging docs, publish path)
• Align per-language changelog/versioning expectations and publishing behavior across go/, java/, python/, js/, and dotnet/
• Reduce cross-language contract ambiguity by documenting supported APIs, packaging expectations, and release-state consistency

Proposed work

• Audit and complete missing packaging metadata and docs in js/ and dotnet/
• Ensure every binding directory has the release/changelog scaffolding expected by release automation
• Review versioning consistency between manifests and release automation
• Add or document publish flows for each binding so install paths match README claims
• Clarify cross-language support level and maturity in the repository docs

Acceptance criteria

• Each supported language package has complete packaging metadata and install docs
• Release automation can version and publish each binding without placeholder gaps
• README accurately reflects package availability and maturity
• Cross-language expectations are documented clearly enough for production adopters