Comment 6 for bug 1630442

If we were to add a new transition/event/verb, I don't think we should use 'skip'. 'skip' means that something is being skipped -- but you don't know what is being skipped. It seems to me that you want a 'go directly to', and since they are both going to 'available', maybe 'available' or some other verb like that ('direct-avail') would work.

I don't understand though, what is wrong with having it go to cleaning first. It is going to cleaning, finding out that it is disabled, and then continuing to available. Is it bad to emit 2 extra notifications?