> Meetings should cover status - what's been happening, what's > planned, > and where people can participate. And it's an opportunity for users > to > complain about what's broken, and ask for help. It is one way to > engage > with the community, and forces a periodic retrospective and > refocusing > of the work. It also ensures that this isn't just a couple of > engineers > doing work inside their company. I would really want to see the outcome of more frequent Storage SIG meetings. I saw that multiple components in Storage SIG fail when we add SELINUX to the equasion. > Note also that if your SIG prefers to have "meetings" via email, for > the > benefit of multi-timezone, multi-language participants, I certainly > think that's fine too. We have evolved a process where IRC meetings > are > the norm, but they are certainly not the only way to do things. So far I was left with the impression that only 3 members are active (Kaleb, Niels and AnoopCS) , but I might be wrong. Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov