Reporting Bugs Against (Long-Term) Supported Kolab Versions

Long-term support versions of Kolab maintain larger sets of different versions of software, and it becomes important to ensure that the fix for an issue in foo-1.0 does not require a properly entitled customer to upgrade to a later version of Kolab, or even a later version of foo.

The stability requirements imply that support be able to track issues with specific versions of the software, targets these issues to be resolved in certain newer versions of the software, and trusts the resolution of the issue to be verifiable against multiple versions of the software collection.


The following table depicts the versions of the roundcubemail package, and the roundcubemail-plugins-kolab package, as distributed for each product stream.

Version table for Roundcubemail and Kolab Plugins



Kolab Enterprise 13



Kolab Enterprise 14



Kolab 16






Stability requirements for Kolab Enterprise 13 demand the following:

  • The version of roundcubemail shipped to the product stream is one of the 1.0 series of upstream releases,

  • Upstream maintains a stable 1.0 series for roundcubemail,

  • The version of roundcubemail-plugins-kolab shipped to the product stream is one of the 3.1 series of upstream releases,

  • Upstream maintains a stable 3.1 series for roundcubemail-plugins-kolab,

  • Future versions of roundcubemail in the 1.0 series remain backward compatibility for consumers of its API (such as roundcubemail-plugins-kolab),

  • Added functionality in roundcubemail-plugins-kolab, if any, does not require any changes in roundcubemail that would break other compatibility,

  • The aforementioned conditions all last for up to 5 years,

  • For a large number of target platforms.

The same conditions apply to Kolab Enterprise 14 and Kolab 16 – with different version series, different timelines and sometimes different stacks.

Further down the dependency stack, this includes maintenance for libkolabxml, libkolab and libcalendaring.

In the future, this will extend up to 6 product streams that will need to be maintained.

It is therefore important that an issue logged against a version 1.0.1, with the current version in the 1.0 series perhaps being 1.0.10, needs to go through the following stages:

  1. Is the issue reproducible in the unstable development version of the software suite?

    1. If it is, it is a development issue; report a bug in Phabricator.

      Developer teams become responsible for testing the resolution of the issue first, and fixing the issue second (see Test-Driven Development).

      For each of the product streams in between current development and the original issue report, create a ticket in bugzilla.

      See also

      • Something about backporting with the verification included.

    2. If it is not, in what product stream can the issue still be reproduced?

      This process can be a very costly lather-rinse-repeat exercise, and therefore needs to be covered ahead of time, through Test-Driven Development.

      Create a bugzilla ticket for the appropriate

      See also

      • Something about constructive troubleshooting efforts

  2. Using the input of 1) and outcome of 1a) or 1b), describe the range of targets;

    • branch 1.2 for Kolab 16: yes or no?

    • branch 1.1 for Kolab Enterprise 14: yes or no?

    • etc.

    Each becomes a separate bugzilla ticket, each of them depending on the resolution of the more recent product stream(‘s software version).


Let’s assume “yay” fails on all versions of Roundcube.

  1. Issue:

    Yay fails on Roundcube 1.0.1 on Santiago

    This is an original ticket. The intended milestone for the resolution is 1.0-next.

  2. Support:

    1. Does yay fail in Winterfell on Maipo ?

      Yes, this is a new development issue; Report a bug. Add a project tag for Winterfell

    2. Does yay fail in Kolab 16 on Maipo ?

      Yes, and Kolab 16 is on the same software version series as Winterfell;

      It is thus a new development issue; Report a bug and have it blocked by the bug created in 2.1).

      Associate the Kolab 16 release target with the bug.

      Also create a bugzilla ticket. The milestone here is 1.2-next. Refer to the task created in Phabricator.

    3. Does yay fail in Kolab Enterprise 14 on Santiago ?

      Yes, create a bugzilla ticket and block it with the ticket created in 2.2). The milestone here is 1.1-next.

    4. Does yay fail in Kolab Enterprise 13 on Santiago using version 1.0.4?

      Yes, block the original ticket in 1) with the ticket from 2.3).