# Release Planning Notes

- Making milestones the name of their semantic version (`1.2.3`) is bad.
- We should consider names for increments `CodeName1` is next, `CodeName2`, is after that
- They have semantic versions, but those are defined as needed once they are about to go out. (Version as intended)
- SemVer stays important but doesn't distract from grouping of features/bugs released and intent.
- Perhaps periodic table element names?
- We agreed that keeping OSCAL and oscal-content separately released and releasable, and no version parity should be necessary.
- How to imply cross repository parity with OSCAL? (using milestone codenames)
- Make [clearer documentation on support guarantees](https://github.com/usnistgov/OSCAL/blob/main/versioning-and-branching.md#versioning), they currently imply that but are not explicit

- We need to add a breaking label (added to other hackmd)
- On breaking changes we should be discretion on when to when (i.e., choosing the time and place)

# Key Criteria

- What's ready to go now?
- What do we need now, but don't have ready?
- Do we wait?
- No, we release what's ready now.
- Yes, then we wait! :-)
- If we're going to wait, how long?