So I do have a question that seems to be related to this.
We went with Rancher instead of Kubernetes because Rancher was easier to deploy, use, and automate. I understand that this move to Kubernetes being made in 2.0 is probably the right one, and maybe even the only real long term choice for Rancher; however, I do worry that we’ll now be entering a situation where we need to become 1) experts on Rancher (UI, API, CLI, and constructs like Service, Stack, etc.), but ALSO, in order to actually leverage anything beyond the basics, 2) become experts on Kubernetes. That’s a lot. The eccentricities of Kubernetes are WHY we didn’t select it over Rancher/Cattle in the first place.
Am I wrong? I’m sure for some things we can probably get away with ignoring the fact that Kubernetes is sitting underneath Rancher now, but how far will that take us? If Rancher is a facade on top of Kubernetes, and we’re going to have to become Kubernetes experts, why not just go all in for Kubernetes without Rancher in front of it?
To summarize, 1) will we need to become proficient in Kubernetes to do anything beyond the basics, and 2) if that’s the case, what is Rancher bringing to the table that makes it worthwhile to become proficient in two systems; both Rancher and Kubernetes instead of “just” Kubernetes?