Comment 16 for bug 2028366

> This is an improvement to the current situation of aborting release upgrade half way through.

Is it? If the user ends up with a broken DKMS package on release upgrade, then at least they'll know about it. But if we silently ignore the failure, the release upgrade will finish pretending that it was successful when it was not, and then what if they find the system broken later?

> Further UX / hooks might be needed in the release upgrade to complete the story of asking the user what they want to do with regressed dkms modules.

I agree that this is appropriate to fix in SRUs, but can we fix the entire story rather than iterating in the stable release?

I prefer not to move the goalposts but I think the above is a big enough concern to be worth considering first.