Edit: I'm speaking to the vendor here, not you, of course...
Kubernetes uses API versioning and takes backward compatibility very seriously for stable APIs.
Regarding LTS, these discussions are happening and increasing in number as time passes. Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXBjA2hH-CQ
The only way frequent upgrades are possibly sane is if you take backwards compat very very very seriously, and succeed at doing so. If users of k8 think it's doing that, that's important info.
(I think many of us are lately getting burned by a lot of open source software that _doesn't_ succeed very well at backwards compat (whether they're trying or not, sometimes it's not clear), _and_ expects you to upgrade all the time).
You can't ask a large-scale company to take a dice-roll on k8s for their infrastructure when the only promise of long-term reliability is "trust us not to make any breaking changes".
k8s is a tale of woeful, hilarious levels of platform immaturity jammed down the public's throat by the Google PR machine. I believe Kubernetes is a centerpiece in Google's cloud play against Amazon (I don't think it will be successful), and that this consideration drives a lot of the particular weirdness and distortion that exists around it.
It'd be a whole different ball game if they discouraged production use and told people "We can't even commit to keeping this up to date for one single year, whereas all other enterprise vendors offer 5 years or more, you'd be silly to think this was ready for prime time." But they don't, because then you don't have starry-eyed brogrammers saying "DUDE, we gotta get on k8s so we can be like my homies in Mountain View, aw man, it's so awesome! It says Google Cloud is the best way to get Kubernetes, call 'em up!"
I feel sorry for anyone who was naive enough to say "Well, if Google does it, so do I!" and jumped headfirst into this bear trap, making themselves collateral damage in a pissing contest between two megacorps.
Source: I work with people who decided to move our entire infrastructure to Kubernetes. We have now run virtually everything on k8s for over a year. I'd feel sorry for them, but they left the company some time later, so now I just feel sorry for me. :)
OpenShift?
We won’t be doing the 10 year support like for RHEL 4/5/6 yet.
Looking forward to what Openshift will bring to the table!
What is so great about running your infrastructure on a platform that has no intention of ensuring long-term stability? Irregardless of how well backward-compatibility is maintained, the idea that we should all move our infrastructure to something that lacks the fundamental promise of "updating won't break everything" seems downright irresponsible.