5 ms·

As K8s matures it's likely we will get some kind of LTS versioning scheme. Having new realeases so often for such a core infrastructure component is kinda insa

• noctarius 2y ago
  I hope you're right. Apart from that, yes I think it's necessary.
• mdaniel 2y ago
  There's a tiny bit of nuance there about "allow seamless upgrades" in that they do what I think is a fantastic job of version skew toleration between all the parts that interact (kubectl, kubelet, apiserver, etc). So that part, I think, is not the long pole in any such tent, especially because if the control-plane gets wiped out, kubelet will continue to manage the last state of affairs it knew about, and traffic will continue to flow to those pods The hairy bit is the rando junk that gets shoved into clutsers, without any sane packaging scheme to roll it up or back. I even recently had to learn the deep guts of the sh.helm.v1.foo secret because we accidentally left an old release in a cluster which no longer supported its apiVersion. No problem, says I, $(helm uninstall && helm install --version new-thing) but har-de-har-har helm uses that Secret to fully rehydrate the whole manifest of the release before deleting it so when helm tries (effectively) kubectl delete thing/v1beta1/oldthing and pukes, well, no uninstall for you, even if those objects are already gone