The first reply on the issue you linked seems incredibly professional and well handled, and even recommends excluding the file from backups, I can't see a single issue there.
Being polite is not quite the same thing as being handled professionally, and definitely not the same thing as handling it correctly.
Telling people to exclude the file from backup came too late for many. E.g., Time Machine users with older disks formatted with HFS+ would find their drives crashed/corrupted/wiped, and lost all their backups. Only afterwards would they start googling to see what happened. (Even now, the relevant FAQ still says "Time Machine supports them, so your backups will not be affected" which is not always correct.)
From the time the issue was opened, to the time they said they admitted they were wrong and excluded the Orbstack image from backups by default, was 13 months. Even if other solutions were on the table, the professional thing to do would have been to exclude the images ASAP, so customers weren't at risk of data loss, and then work on alternatives afterwards.
