Re: [DISCUSSION] Web site maintenance

Mon, 08 Dec 2025 04:20:53 -0800 

Hi,
The old repositories are under Red Hat/IBM so there was need to investigate what can be done and there was limitations that came from the vendor. The change is communicated on this list. 


This change is part of setting the repositories into hibernation where 
they turn into read only mode. I believe this is what all the parties 
hope to happen.


Toni Rikkola

On 07/12/2025 17.28, Alex Porcelli wrote:

Thanks for the update, and for the effort you and others have put into
investigating options. However, let me raise a few concerns.

First, and probably the most important point: making decisions through
internal discussions and then communicating the results on the mailing
list feels misaligned with the Apache Way. Even if the intention is to
coordinate among people who work for the same employer, the
decision-making itself should happen here on the public list with the
community.

Second: I understand and fully agree that older versions are not ASF
releases and therefore cannot be hosted on the ASF infrastructure.
That part is clear.

However, the brands were donated to the ASF. Because of that, any
decision that affects how the community manages or presents those
brands, including where related legacy content is hosted, how it is
linked, and how it is framed, must be discussed openly here.

I would really appreciate guidance from IPMC and our mentors. From my
perspective, maintaining a "shadow organization" (kiegroup) with the
same branding and positioning as before the donation may not be in
Apache KIE's best interest.

-
Alex


On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 9:21 PM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:

I'll start by stating that, as a PPMC, I don't have any rights in the
kiegroup organization. As far as I know, it's fully managed by IBM
(ex-Red Hat).

I can see Alex's concern, but the old versions don't belong to ASF, so
it's natural to be hosted by the historical owner. They are really old
stuff... We will just upload and freeze them. We don't need to
"manage".

Toshiya

On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 11:15 AM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:

As an IBMer myself, I’ll start an internal discussion between people who
might have admin rights (or who know who would) in those environments
(docs, websites, and GitHub org) so we can see what can be done. I’ll keep
you posted. I’ll include in the conversation the donation of the domains,
as in my understanding, should be under this community’s control, as the
brands were donated to Apache with the code.

We (as IBMers) had an internal discussion and our plan is:

- Host old version downloads/documents in `kiegroup`
- We will not rename `kiegroup` (because renaming would largely affect
CIs), but will adjust descriptions/READMEs so that it doesn’t confuse
Apache KIE users.

Regarding the donation of the domains, we haven't collected enough
information yet, but the topic will likely be a new ML thread.

Regards,
Toshiya

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 4:59 AM Tiago Bento <[email protected]> wrote:

Where Red Hat (or IBM) wants to host old artifacts is on their discretion.
We have many Red Hatters and IBMers here (myself included) so I think this
is something “they” should solve outside the ML.

Once we know what “they” are planning we can decide, here, whether or not
we want to link to the place where this content is or lands so that our
users understand our history and the continued path that brought us to
Apache.

Regarding the supposed “shadow org”, I’m all in favor of renaming it and
positioning it as a fork, but that’s also on Red Hat’s (or IBM’s)
discretion. All this community can do is ask that “they” accept our request
to rename it and update their communications not to clash with Apache KIE,
thus not confusing our users.

As an IBMer myself, I’ll start an internal discussion between people who
might have admin rights (or who know who would) in those environments
(docs, websites, and GitHub org) so we can see what can be done. I’ll keep
you posted. I’ll include in the conversation the donation of the domains,
as in my understanding, should be under this community’s control, as the
brands were donated to Apache with the code.

Thanks Toni, Toshiya and others for pushing this forward!

Regards,

Tiago Bento


On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 14:56 Alex Porcelli <[email protected]> wrote:


I'll start by stating that, as a PPMC, I don't have any rights in the
kiegroup organization. As far as I know, it's fully managed by IBM
(ex-Red Hat).

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 2:55 PM Jason Porter <[email protected]>
wrote:

What other suggestion do you have for things that were released (on that

org) before the move to the ASF? Creating a new org just to hold some old
binaries, IMO, does not make a lot of sense.

--
Jason Porter
Software Engineer
He/Him/His

IBM


From: Alex Porcelli <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 at 11:37
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSSION] Web site maintenance
Jason,

Not sure about using kiegroup, actually this is a shadow org, and we
should try to fix it (at least rename). We shouldn't use a shadow org
for anything that is not aligned with Apache, we should just not do.

-
Alex

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 1:31 PM Jason Porter <[email protected]>

wrote:

I don’t see that as problem at all, excellent solution! We could put

the older releases on the kiegroup repos/org.

Toni or Kobayashi-san are one of you able to get those uploaded to

github?

--
Jason Porter
Software Engineer
He/Him/His

IBM


From: Toni Rikkola <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 at 11:14
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSSION] Web site maintenance
Not sure if I understand the problem correctly, but we could we push

the

items as they are into a GitHub repository and serve the legacy pages
from there? Basically the same thing as hosting them at Red Hat, but
without a risk of a rug pull.

Or if the docs were packaged and published to a maven repository, link
to those.

Toni

On 22/10/2025 19.38, Jason Porter wrote:

Yes, that would be acceptable. Maybe put everything under a

“Non-Apache Software Foundation Previous Releases and Documentation” or
“Previous Releases and Documentation Prior to ASF Migration” section. Both
of those are a lot of words. Maybe there’s a better way to say that.


    *   https://groovy.apache.org/download.html     - Though I don’t

like how they have small wording saying it is not ASF

    *   Netbeans doesn’t have anything
    *   https://www.openoffice.org/download/archive.html     -

OpenOffice calls them “Archived Versions” – maybe we could do the same?

    *   CouchDB doesn’t have any of their pre-ASF releases
    *   Doesn’t look like Derby does either
    *   Neither does subversion

It doesn’t look like there is a consensus among different projects

as to how they handle this situation.

Given what Alex stated about the JBoss Infra, I don’t know if we

have a good answer to this ☹

--
Jason Porter
Software Engineer
He/Him/His

IBM


From: Toshiya Kobayashi <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2025 at 19:48
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSSION] Web site maintenance
Hi all,

I checked that on the incubator ML.

https://lists.apache.org/thread/gbwc1yypc03wb0hw1mf5fxwhh8ypzyrj


Only releases made under the Apache Incubator can be hosted on ASF

infrastructure like kie.apache.org.

Older (pre-Apache) releases such as 7.x or 8.x cannot be mirrored

or served there, but you may link to them from your download page if it’s
made very clear they’re non-ASF releases (e.g., add a note like “These are
pre-Apache releases and not ASF-approved.”).

So, we cannot move old docs/binaries to kie.apache.org.

Currently the kie.apache.org website has pages with links to the

older versions.



https://kie.apache.org/docs/components/drools/drools_old_documentation

https://kie.apache.org/docs/components/drools/drools_old_downloads

I think that's the right direction. The wording should be improved by
clarifying they are non-ASF releases.

Would that be acceptable?

Regards,
Toshiya

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 3:24 PM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hi, our mentors

Is it okay to move the old downloads (released before our ASF move)

to

kie.apache.org so that users can download them?

Regards,
Toshiya

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 2:15 AM Jason Porter

<[email protected]> wrote:

For 10 and forward yes. For older downloads, which are not part of

the ASF, we need to figure out what to do with them.

--
Jason Porter
Software Engineer
He/Him/His

IBM


From: Alex Porcelli <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2025 at 19:18
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSSION] Web site maintenance
Thank you, Toshiya!

In regards the downloads, I'd argue that it would be better to

move to

Apache. As it's the new `owner` of the brands.

On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 9:05 PM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

I have filed a GH issue for the old docs migration. I'll work on

this.

https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/2138

Btw, regarding old version downloads, they are still available in

https://download.jboss.org/drools/release/
https://download.jboss.org/optaplanner/release/
https://download.jboss.org/jbpm/release/

(Note: they are not drools.org etc.)

Do we also want to move them to kie.apache.org ?

Regards,
Toshiya

On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 11:36 PM Kennedy Bowers <

[email protected]> wrote:

Sounds like a good idea, +1

On 2025/10/07 05:07:45 Toshiya Kobayashi wrote:

Maybe we could move that content under ASF and have docs

supporting

older versions?

Yes, we can.

If there are no objections or concerns raised within the next

few

days, I’ll create a GitHub issue for this task.

Cheers,
Toshiya

On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 9:13 PM Alex Porcelli <[email protected]>

wrote:

Hi Toshyia,

Thank you for the redirection, although I hear you about older

version

docs... and I agree. My concern is that those domains should

belong to

ASF, and pointing it to an external infrastructure is quite

worrisome.

Maybe we could move that content under ASF and have docs

supporting

older versions?

On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 12:54 AM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,

I'm happy to inform that now drools.org, optaplanner.org and

jbpm.org

are redirected to https://kie.apache.org/

Note that docs subdomain (docs.drools.org,

docs.optaplanner.org and

docs.jbpm.org) stay the same to provide old version

documents.

Regards,
Toshiya

On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 4:16 PM Toni Rikkola <

[email protected]> wrote:

We need to do the same for optaplanner.org and jbpm.org.

Apache requires us to have everything under kie.apache.org.

Both of the websites have already been moved.

Toni

On 2025/07/04 01:40:16 Toshiya Kobayashi wrote:

Hi all,

We have migrated the contents to kie.apache.org.

I'm going to ask the administrator of drools.org web

server (Red Hat) to

redirect from https://www.drools.org         to

https://kie.apache.org/         .

I think this is not something like "proposal" or "vote", so

I'm notifying

it here.

If there are no objections for a few days, I'll proceed.

Thanks,
Toshiya

On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 6:09 PM Toni Rikkola <

[email protected]> wrote:

Current status.

Everything moved or there is an existing PR pending for a

move.

https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1713

The blog will stay where it is. The kie.apache.org can

just have the

product release and other project announcements. Everyone

can blog where

they want and we can even link to those blogs from our

Apache site.

kie.org is pretty much just links to blogs, so nothing to

move there that

is not already in kie.apache.org.

There is a separate ticket for documentation. This only

moves what is

worth the move from websites to the new location.

Toni

On 2025/04/28 07:44:50 Toni Rikkola wrote:

Thank you Toshiya. I will move Optaplanner.


https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1936

Toni

On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 6:50 AM Toshiya Kobayashi <
[email protected]> wrote:


Thank you for the initiative, Toni.

We have a parent GH issue: "Migrate KIE Websites to

Apache

Infrastructure"

https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1713

I added a sub-issue : "Migrate drools.org to

kie-website" :
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1934

Toshiya


On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 3:23 PM Toni Rikkola

<[email protected]>

wrote:


I can start the work for drools and Toshiya offered

help. I can also

take

on Optaplanner.

That leaves jbpm. I know dmn had a site setup, but not

sure if we

need/want

a separate section for it in the future?

Toni

On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 2:56 AM Craig Russell <

[email protected]>

wrote:


Peanut here.

What Toni sez.

Right now, an internet search for "drools" returns

links to the

obsolete

drools.org <http://drools.org/        > web site,

which makes it seem like

drools

is dead. The downloads on the site are years old.

Wrong message.

I'd suggest to copy any current data still on

drools.org <

http://drools.org/        > to a section on

kie.apache.org <

http://kie.apache.org/        >

In "no time at all" search engines will notice that

drools is now

homed

at

kie.

Until the domain expires, now redirect drools.org <

http://drools.org/        >

to

kie.apache.org <http://kie.apache.org/        > .

Unless this is done, the project is missing out on a

lot of

possible

users.

Same for other domains that are now kie projects.

HTH,
Craig


On Apr 24, 2025, at 03:57, Toni Rikkola

<[email protected]

wrote:

Hello,

Right now we have drools.org and kie.apache.org and

I guess the

same

goes

for every other subproject.

Old sites
* They break the copyrights that Apache now has for

KIE.

* They get a lot of hits and the site contents are

1.5 years old.

Basically

they say the project is dead, use something else.
* No updates. No mentions of the Apache releases
* Can go down at any moment since this community does

not fund

them

New site
* No content

Both
* No, or minimal, resources to maintain them

Looking at the fact that it has been years. It is

clear we have

no

motivation or man power to maintain these. So the

question is

what is

the

shortest path to victory?

My suggestion is we use the domains and forward to

kie.apache.org as

soon

as possible. Right now the old domains are sending

the wrong

signal.

I am sure we have a lot of ideas, but also consider

where we get

the

resources to implement. For few years there has been

none.

Toni Rikkola

Craig L Russell
[email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]






























					Reply via email to