<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:23 AM, Victoria Risk <<a href="mailto:vicky@isc.org" class="">vicky@isc.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:14 AM, Christian Kratzer <<a href="mailto:ck@cksoft.de" class="">ck@cksoft.de</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">having all the premium features in a separate git repo with access to premium members only would definetely be a real "premium" feature.<br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Sorry, I missed this point and went straight to defending the premium features model. This is a good idea and a reasonable request. It would also make it easier for subscribers to get beta versions. Well talk about it.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Vicky</div><div><br class=""></div><br class=""></body></html>