ProductionReady

We’re excited to officially announce @ProductionReady, a 501(c)(3) public charity established by @Excellion, @jimmysong, @parkeralewis, and @jratcliff to advance open-source Bitcoin development through education and funding for a new conservative Bitcoin client.

@ajtowns x.com/productionread…

Always nice to know what people consider their minimum viable product.

ProductionReady, huh? Donations accepted! ️✅ X link! ️✅ LinkedIn link! ️✅ Nostr link!️✅ Board member headshots!️✅ Github?

ProductionReady is a 501(c)(3) public charity that will fund development of a new Bitcoin client, not the development team for the client. The GitHub icon on our website will link to the repository for that client, when it is ready to be announced.

Most likely one of the biggest and important news for the Bitcoin community in 2026.

I am thrilled to see the emergence of @ProductionReady, and am very supportive of its mission to protect Bitcoin’s monetary properties. Why? As Jimmy writes, “A single dominant implementation means a single set of maintainers making decisions for the entire network. That's a centralization risk…” This is a positive development for Bitcoin.

.@ProductionReady has officially launched as a new nonprofit dedicated to funding a conservative Bitcoin client. This initiative aims to enhance network resilience by prioritizing stability and user sovereignty. You can read the full details about their mission below. ⬇️

Speaking as a former BI Developer, this is a must read. We knew something was really off with Bitcoin Core. But we also know Bitcoin's Core code is the DNA of what makes Bitcoin great. Bitcoin's code has to be defended, protected, respected. As a Pleb, I thank you four Bitcoin Horseman for understanding something needed to be done and taking the initiative to form ProductionReady. As a developer, I love the name, as Production Code needs to be defended, protected, and respected. Just like 98% of Knots is Bitcoin Core, so will be this new Bitcoin client proposal. However, it makes sense to have this 'conservative' structure this type of code. Protocols are not the same as coding a video game that constantly needs new features to keep consumers happy. Bitcoin is money. It's an A++ rated digital money with the best track record. Protected. I have been reflecting lately, I reject tribalism but struggle when I can't, with any cell in my body, support Bitcoin Core (woke or not, their actions are indefensible.) After listening to half (so far) of @knutsvanholm and @jonatack podcast, I feel we do need to stop connecting the dots of the past and move forward to a better Bitcoin future. For instance, I know some of my rhetoric has been wrong, including lumping in ALL support/funding (e.g. VCs or other) as bad or compromised. I have been incorrect lumping OpenSats into that net by mistake. Jon explains it all very well around the 40 minute mark here, weaving in and out of the good, the bad, and the ugly: fountain.fm/episode/O2I3sT… Again, I feel thanks to @hodlonaut, @giacomozucco, Mechanic, Dathun, Renaud, Daniel, Luke, Matthew, Justin, Jon, Wladamir (I feel this guy from only listening to his past), Knut, and Bob Burnett have really helped open up my eyes and mind. What do all these guys have in common aside from passion for Bitcoin? COMMUNICATION SKILLS using logic and reasoning. Developers are some of the most logical people on earth because their code has to be perfect down to Binary, down to two numbers: 1 = ON 0 = OFF Code doesn't work when the bits are flipped the wrong way or the incentive is flipped the wrong way. Where the individual is incentivized not for what is right for Bitcoin. That said, how can I help? My two cents: - Make it so the best developers, the mavericks, who like to work alone are compensated and given the space they need - Do not 'Corporatize' any of them, pick from around the world - "Ossification" of a protocol aligns exactly with how I think but Jack went after @thepowerfulHRV when he dared support ossification by saying essentially "this guy doesn't understand Bitcoin." (ossification doesn't mean you can't fix 'bugs' so maybe it's a definition thing?) Hopefully ProductionReady will be OpenSource not only with their code but their direction and PnP? Perhaps defining other words like ossification, "concensus", SPAM. The language Core uses (double speak) most of us do not understand? ....I can go on and on but I know my stuff is way too TLDR (I post for myself and my family's Bitcoin, LLC, "Strategic Reserve." I have purchased 0 Sats since Cover V30 BTW and look forward to buying more soon.) Thanks Samson, Jimmy, Parker, and John for @ProductionReady . This is a great initiative, you may botch it all but at least you know we Plebs out here will be watching and protecting or stabbing you in the back based on results and or your direction and execution. Bitcoin is too important to botch or play games with as you know. How can I help? Salute.

Everyone celebrated yesterday’s exciting announcement about a new Bitcoin client project. 🧡 The only exception was those who control and profit from the Bitcoin Core industrial complex, whose responses ran the spectrum from stunned silence to outright hostility.

Congrats @Excellion @jimmysong @parkeralewis @jratcliff! This looks awesome! Can't wait to see what projects are funded through this initiative. Crazy potential here.

Good people doing good work.

Absolutely the right move at the right time.

Happy to see this.

Worth checking out -- the part I've highlighted here is especially important.

ProductionReady: 샘손모우, 지미송, 파커루이스, 존랫클리프가 설립한 공익 자선 단체. 새로운 보수적인 비트코인 ​​클라이언트를 위한 교육과 자금 지원을 통해 오픈 소스 비트코인 ​​개발을 발전시키는 것을 목표로 함. 비트코인 코어, 노츠 등에 이어 "새로운 보수적인" 비트코인 구현체 등장?!

Our latest episode with @jonatack is out, and his perspectives are incredibly valuable for the space. Coincidentally, with the launch of @ProductionReady, the emergence of work on a new client implementation is well-timed. My position right now is that node client decentralization is the best single change that can benefit the network the most, not just in terms of arbitrary data but in terms of all aspects of the protocol. Not having one dominant client (no one client with 50% or more of the market share, across versions) would be my ideal state of affairs. No one group can make policy changes that affect more than 50% of the network at once (and users can still pick and choose which software to run). None of this is to say that good work isn't being done at Core, and my understanding is that this new implementation will borrow the good work that Core produces, as Knots does already. That's the beauty of open source. The security work by @dergoegge for example is fantastic stuff, there's no reason to throw that out in the name of conservatism. I also echo Jon's view on BIP-110 at this point, and @giacomozucco and others. I personally will be perfectly happy if it is activated without causing a split, but I'm skeptical that will happen. I believe efforts like this new implementation are a more robust solution for the long term, and perhaps it will be easier to find consensus on changes that impose sensible limits on arbitrary data in the future. Check out the episode, let us know what you think, and of course, don't forget to tell me why I'm wrong! That's most important.

This is fantastic news for the space. More competition in clients is good for the network.

Thank you all for stepping up, desparately needed 🧡

Congratulations @Excellion @jimmysong @parkeralewis Diversity of clients is a good thing.

Love it.

Hey Bitcoiners, let's donate some Sats⚡️☕️🔥😎

The first step was just announced. Follow @ProductionReady for more updates when we’re ready.