The stable version should do fine to be honest, one really shouldn’t have to use development for normal usage (I don’t). Some of the new stuff is rather nice though and on occasion some annoying bugs are already fixed in development.
I can only, strongly, advise you to make sure that you calibrate and use software that actually makes use of it. It would not be the first time that a (jpeg) viewer shows images in the wrong way due to this. But…
I’m not entirely sure that this is the case in the scenario that you are presenting here, or at least not the only/predominant one. I had a better look at all the modules in your sidecar (the first one you posted which uses the frame module) and especially how you used them.
It seems that a combination of things make this issue stand out more. The main thing that needs to be changed are the exposure/filmic settings. This image isn’t one that can use the default settings, they need to be adjusted. And your edit lacks any reconstruction done in filmic. Especially that last one is crucial to get a much better end-result. I used reconstruction to fix, among other things, the cars red tail-light.
Without the reconstruction/edits done in exposure and filmic the changes you made in the colour calibration module seem to make things a bit worse.
darktable might be able to show a (somewhat!) correct version of the image while editing (the tail-lights doesn’t look good though) this discrepancy most probably will show up after exporting. Especially when going from a wider working profile to the smaller srgb profile.
So I think this seems to be more an edit issue than a export/calibration issue, although those do tend to go hand-in-hand.
I would suggest you try changing some settings in exposure and filmic and do some reconstruction to see if that lessens or removes the issue completely.