Comment 2 for bug 1826045

Thank you for working on this.

I was curious to understand why proposed migration didn't block this change from hitting the release pocket. Is there a missing dependency somewhere? For example:

> The current version of pcs in disco is 0.10.x, which requires pacemaker >= 2.0 and corosync >=3.0, neither of which are available yet.

If this statement is true, then why isn't there a dependency declaring this, which would (I'm assuming) have prevented this situation from arising?