Hi,
it seems that https://rules.sonarsource.com/ is not reachable anymore.
Is this site intentionally removed or just temporarily down?
I had been using this page to easily reference different SonarQube rules (and their documentation), such that others can just click the link to learn about the rule, instead of needing to setup their own SonarQube instance.
If this is removed permanently, what alternative is there for referencing specific rules?
Help would be greatly appreciated.
Hi,
Welcome to the community!
Yes, we’ve taken the site down. I don’t have a lot of detail for you. Official communication is in the works.
Ann
Hi again,
Okay, here’s the official statement:
The SonarQube rules site is currently unavailable as is the RSPEC repo. SonarQube users are able to view rules within the SonarQube console. We recognize the rules site and rspec repository are a valuable resource and will provide additional updates as available.
If you have specific questions about a SonarQube rule, please reach out to support@sonarsource.com.
HTH,
Ann
Hi there 
the only current workaround available (in my view) seems to be
next.sonarqube.com/sonarqube/coding_rules
I think rules.sonarsource.com did also include info about a specific rules availability in community and/or commercial editions, right? (i might be wrong, though) 
I do not see a filter for this in the next.sonarqube instance.
Maybe all rules are now available in community edition? \o/ 
btw, i placed my vent about the way a user/customer perceives the result over there.
It is totally understandable that (at sonarsource) different ppl perform different actions to different parts of the system (at different times).
What we (users/customers) perceive is the result of those actions.
cheers,
Daniel
Hi Daniel,
I get it.
Actually the Next rule list will be going private too soon. The workaround is to look at the rules in your SonarQube instance (on-prem) or organization (Cloud).
HTH,
Ann
Whoa, so my little spideysenses tingling was right. That normally makes me feel good. Not this time.
So now this i interpret as “signs of coordinated action”. Which actually feels even more like a removal of (for years) openly available information 
Even if it hurts … One might wonder, what might be a (user/customer benefitting) cause behind such a bold move? :befuddled: Genuinely asking, though. Because, there still might be a benevolent reason … for example: a better alternative?
P.S.: I presume/think we both have an understanding for each others motivations, when reading what we typed 
I’m just feeling the need for strongly wording because of “broken windows” and stuff. 
Your workaround (the next.sonar… link) used to work (I’ve posted a lot of suggestions about improving rule descriptions and linking to that site for presumably the latest version of the description). But now it doesn’t show the rule description, just some basic info (name of the rule and which QP’s it’s in).
you are right. My only guess - when pondering about the reasons for this decision - is that someone thinks that this content must be worth hiding from interweb-scrapers. (oh, and from you and me, too)
As Ann already found out (and told us early, ty for that!), this - sadly - was planned and about to happen.
btw, the “official statement” only mentioned “[…]will provide additional updates as available” … so a theoretical possible update - when available - could also be: “yup, its gone now, tough luck. have a good day, ma’am”, right? 
That’s too bad. Having a definitive reference for rule descriptions is useful. If I see a rule description (from my own server) I think could be improved, I first check to see what the latest description says to make sure it hasn’t already been changed, before posting a suggestion to this forum.
This site was really useful for me. I used it e.g. in my PR reviews, where I could reference to the rules for my colleagues. I hope it will come back.
This site was invaluable for SonarAnalyzer.CSharp, all warnings link directly to the rules page.
We don’t use SonarQube, we’re just using the SonarAnalyzer.CSharp package, how are we supposed to diagnose and fix rules now?
The rules page was very valuable for providing examples of non-compliant and compliant code.
Hi @rcocks-hl,
You can install free SonarQube for IDE extension along our Nugets, like SonarQube for Visual Studio, or other flavors.
That’s the closest experience, with the same rules, and it will bring the rule descriptions directly into your IDE when you click on the issue.
If you use our .NET rules only in IDE, you won’t need the Nugets anymore. If you use the NuGets also in CI, or with colleagues that don’t have the extension, you should keep both (extension and NuGets).
The Roslyn analyzer provides faster feedback than any extension, and we use a range of editors from vscode to Rider, so it would be a pain to manage extensions for everyone on the team.
Having the roslyn analyzer work through nuget ensures consistency across the team and with checking at CI time.
It also honours suppressions through .editorconfig which we make extensive use of to address issues.
I just don’t understand why rules.sonarsource.com has been taken down?
Please consider bring back as a static site. Stick it behind cloudflare with generous cache times if you need to, which would keep traffic to the origin server a minimum.