My own thinking is that it'd be better if we had machines that could be
remote into with something like VNC.
The hosting developer could be anyone. A bit like how René is currently
hosting the macOS CI builder machines. But it would allow us to give
some credentials out to anyone, even if they're involved with a GSoC or
have come along later.
Having them be remotable doesn't have to be an ethier-or, and happy to
see us taking use of older machines for testing.
Developer meeting is tomorrow and the 9th, PLC video meeting is 9th
Dec. We could discuss this developer funding issue there too.
Best Regards, Martin Owens
On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 11:30 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
I think that sounds like a good idea. I don't think we need an
official policy on something if we're not going to do it regularly,
we can just handle it on a case-by-case basis.
Noticed that you mentioned a 2018 one, but would it be better to have
an ARM based Mac Mini? Would be nice to have someone with that HW
testing the builds as well. I think they're also cheaper (not sure
about in Europe).
On Nov 30 2021, at 3:46 am, tavmjong(a)free.fr wrote:
> Hi all,
> I would like to raise the topic of getting hardware into
> developer's hands. I'm really not sure the best way to do this (or
> if we should). My motivation is the frustration I'm having with not
> knowing if I am breaking the our MacOSX code with the refactoring I
> am doing... and when I do get reports of breakage, not being able
> to fix it (it's currently broken now!). A little research shows
> that a 2018 Mac Mini can be had for around $1000. Given our current
> financial state, that would see like a reasonable investment. I
> could imagine though, coming up with a policy of what kind of
> support is given to who could be quite a challenge.
> Inkscape Board of Directors mailing list --
> To unsubscribe send an email to
Inkscape Board of Directors mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to