My thoughts are conflicted and hypocritical.
I think that CSC's are only really worthwhile with a pancake lens, otherwise I'm as well using my fairly compact and light 600D.
Despite this, and despite being seduced by the Panasonic GF1 a few years ago, I held off, I wanted to see what Canon would do, and being a tight Scot, I didn't want to buy into another camera system.
My M is brilliant with the 22mm. I have the adaptor, but so far have only used it for a test, to see how the M got on with my EF lenses. Which was fine.
It is really handy to think that in a pinch I could mount EF lenses to my M. But I didn't buy it for that.
I love the form of it, I love how solid it feels. I love the touchscreen menus. I love the wee 22mm lens.
And the images are a stop better for noise etc than my d4 cameras.
I intend to keep it as a pocket CSC, however I can see some applications being useful, i.e. I was shooting a car review last week with a Jaguar F-Type, and I got on just about fine with my 600D and Tokina 11-16 for interior dialogue, the GoPro stuff wasn't really much cop (N.B> I have the Hero and Hero2, Hero2 is equivalent to Hero3 Silver in terms of lens, sensor etc, GoPros need EXCELLENT light to give nice footage) but I can see the EOS m getting into spaces where the 600D wouldn't. And the IQ is miles above the GoPro.
A wider pancake would be ideal. I would consider getting the EF-M 11-22 but for 2 factors:
A CSC really should only have pancakes to retain the size benefit.
I already have the stop-2 stops faster Tokina.
So there you go. Conflicted and contradictory.
We should shoot more and talk less.