Define whether the working group wants to create a repo of component definitions

[mcleo-d]

Due date : 17th November 2023

This GitHub issues represents part of the roadmap defined by the OSCAL working group on #13

Tasks

Beta Give feedback

1. Define whether the working group wants to create a repo of component definitions
2. Define whether the working group wants to create an OSCAL catalog?
3. Define whether the group needs a repo that is friendly for managing OSCAL content, catalogs and service definitions?
4. Define whether the repo be a database or a GitHub repo?
5. Potential for GitHub repo(s) that can be contributed via pull request
6. Potential for cloud object storage that can be indexed and displayed.
7. Potential for delivery pipeline from GitHub repo into other hosted service

[jonmuk]

My view would be that this working group would NOT create the catalog but that would be the role of the subsequent joint working group after we complete the taxonomy, threat and representation working groups. At the point we complete those groups we will have defined how to create a complete CCC record.

We would then create a fourth working group (others would close) and create the catalogue of OSCAL definitions from that group.

[robmoffat]

@eddie-knight discussed using the existing CCC repo, and the existing directory structure, e.g.

services/
  database/
    relational/
      <oscal files here>

For each service there will be an OSCAL component, represented in XML, JSON and YAML.

Discussion for the maintainers about whether they want to do this.

@eddie-knight suggested to wait for the first PR to decide.