Re: [beagleboard] Re: nodejs, v4.x/v6.x transition

2016-11-16 Thread Robert Nelson
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Jason Kridner wrote: > > >> On Nov 16, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, mtn_beagle >> wrote: >>> >>> Just to note what is on the

Re: [beagleboard] Re: nodejs, v4.x/v6.x transition

2016-11-16 Thread Jason Kridner
> On Nov 16, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, mtn_beagle > wrote: >> >> >>> Just to note what is on the Nodered.org site: >> >> >> Note: Node.js 7.x is under active development and is not

Re: [beagleboard] Re: nodejs, v4.x/v6.x transition

2016-11-16 Thread William Hermans
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, mtn_beagle > wrote: > > > > > >> Just to note what is on the Nodered.org site: > > > > > > Note: Node.js 7.x is under active development and is not

Re: [beagleboard] Re: nodejs, v4.x/v6.x transition

2016-11-16 Thread Robert Nelson
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, mtn_beagle wrote: > > >> Just to note what is on the Nodered.org site: > > > Note: Node.js 7.x is under active development and is not recommended for a > stable base. Many 3rd party node packages may not yet fully support Node 6.x

[beagleboard] Re: nodejs, v4.x/v6.x transition

2016-11-16 Thread mtn_beagle
Just to note what is on the Nodered.org site: *Note*: Node.js 7.x is under active development and is not recommended for a stable base. Many 3rd party node packages may not yet fully support Node 6.x and later, especially if they contain a binary component. Check with the author of the