On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 2:54 PM Strahil Nikolov via CentOS-devel < centos-devel at centos.org> wrote: > > > 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. srsly? You want more meetings? For three months in a row last year Niels and I sat around on #centos-meeting at the scheduled time waiting to see if anyone else was going to show up. Each time, after about 15 minutes we called it quits. When people actually start attending then I'd be willing to consider having more. > I saw that multiple components in Storage SIG fail when we > add SELINUX to the equasion. > Where are the bug reports or github issues? Although honestly, if you find a bug (e.g. a crash, an AVC denial, etc.) please report it directly to the upstream project. Unless it's a bug that's directly related to the actual packaging... I've frankly got better things to do than be a proxy for bugzillas and github issues. The packages I'm involved with use an rpm .spec file that is 99% identical to the upstream project's .spec file, so even if there's a bug in the packaging, odds are it should get reported upstream (first) anyway. -- Kaleb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20210115/d8d95bae/attachment-0005.html>