On 2021-07-08 11:08:19 +0100 (+0100), Sean Mooney wrote: [...]
well it was not so much arguaing for any partical one i was just expecting a few short words for each that was eliminated. X was eliminated becasue it might conflict with Y. [...] so i just ecpecting too see some kind of indication of what disqulifed the items that had more votes.
I'm no lawyer, but I understand there's a hesitancy to unnecessarily make public disclosures with that level of detail. If someone comes along and wants to sue over uses of OpenStack Yoga, they might point to one of the reasons we discounted Yak and claim we should have known not to use Yoga on similar grounds (this is merely an example, I personally have no idea why any of the eliminated options were considered risky). Much of the practice of intellectual property law, rather unfortunately, relies on "plausible deniability" in an attempt to limit liability. The way they probably see it is that the more detail they provide, the greater our overall risk becomes. -- Jeremy Stanley