Brandon Kite

Done reviewing for now, will wait for the requested changes before approving.

Should this be an arg to GTF instead, since the chain id would be part of the tx format?

Non-tx [UTXO IDs](https://github.com/FuelLabs/fuel-specs/blob/master/specs/protocol/identifiers.md#utxo-id) should also be domain separated. This could look like: `Fee ID = hash("coinbase" || block_height)` `Deposit ID = hash("deposit" || deposit_nonce)` Where `block_height` and `deposit_nonce` are both...

Now that UtxoId's are based on transaction and output index, the above domain separated hash scheme may need some changes.

What kind of versioning scheme should we use for nightly releases?

I agree with the sentiment that a node only functioning as a pure blockchain validator / block producer shouldn't have to incur extra database hits to build and maintain secondary...

Connecting things under the hood between fuel-indexer and fuel-core is a good idea. I think the main architectural issue we have right now is that all the APIs for fuel-core...

@adlerjohn we need to update the ci requirements on the repo to merge this pr

@xgreenx can you also update `CONTRIBUTING.md` with the updated instructions for running the nightly formatter?

closes: #50 Linking the issue for reference since block producer is the component we actually intend to build which will enable multi-tx blocks.