But my concern is about how they are scheduling breaking changes to occur so frequently, and almost two years in advance! Why induce that kind of headache over and over so regularly that the short-term issues become a long-term software maintenance burden?

I cannot imagine working on a software project where I'd want to plan out four distinct breaking change updates. I simply cannot prognosticate my needs that well, nor chessmaster so deeply that I wouldn't just do it in one bigger change. If they're anything like me, that means they're committing to inducing the hassle _without even knowing what the payoff is_!