the big question that lies ahead for rbitcoin is: how can we be sure that there won't be a consensus divergence with bitcoin core (or some other dominant implementation)? the current answer is that rbitcoin has a comprehensive (probably the most comprehensive) suite of consensus tests which fully validate its consensus implementation on every build. that combined with running differential fuzz and 70+ of core's functional test scripts every night is what gives me the confidence to (recklessly?) run it as my sole source of truth for my wallets going forward. development of rbitcoin has led to one additional consensus test case being proposed for bitcoin core, 3 consensus differences being raised with rust-bitcoin (one already rejected because it is historical only and no historical block hit it), and 4-5 additional consensus rules being proposed for hornet. what would it take for you to trust rbitcoin to stay in consensus with bitcoin core?

at the rust-bitcoin summit, it has become clear that before rbitcoin takes over as the reference consensus implementation for bitcoin it will take over as the reference esplora implementation.

Elon's basic idea seems to be: improve and evolve civilization faster than governments can destroy it.

rbitcoin code coverage stats are going to fall today due to a reorganization of the code. to improve build time as we approach the 0.9 release, @grok and I are rearranging a bunch of code in #1097 which gets (most?) test code out of the numerator and denominator of the code coverage metrics. this reduces the apparent coverage but makes it more honest. New test coverage will be > 89% and we'll continue ratcheting up from there against the production code.