@kurulumu-Net hmm. That certainly would indicate that 16.x is supported. I was told by @baris some time ago that this wasn't in fact supported, but that could have changed since our last discussion - or, the documentation is incorrect.
Time for update to 1.4.4!
Guess its best to follow this
Thanks @rod , will try this out. Any issues with 1.4.4 so far?
rod last edited by
@Jenkler I am running
v1.4.4and have not found any concerns after upgrading from
Time to upgrade then
rod last edited by
@Jenkler Do you have a "dev" setup that you test in before? I put together a simple outline of how I clone my production environment to a dev/test environment to which I test my updates first. If you care you may find my post here:
I have not updated my post in a while but it should still be accurate.
Thanks, I will take a look at it Need to keep busy
teh_g last edited by
Here is what I did for my changes when I went up to 1.4.x
Yeah! Updated to 1.4.4 + static content thru nginx... Cheers mates
Works great! Time to relax and play some games
My understanding from what I have read is that the designers seem to want to remove serving the static content through the node.js engine
Yes and no... if you are using nginx or another reverse proxy, you may as well have nginx handle it... but NodeBB will always be a usable fallback if you don't wish to configure it. It's a tad slower, but nothing to really worry about unless you want to squeeze every ounce of performance from the machine/code
oPignonLibre last edited by
For what its worth I upgraded nodebb to 1.4.4 without changing the nginx config to handle the static content. I will do it in the near future but I need to change my docker setup. So don't be afraid to migrate without changing your reverse proxy settings.
Standard recommendations about doing backups (and test restores) applies.
I am also running docker! Needed to mount both my nodejs and nginx volumes to the nginx container. It works good, as it should. Nginx for static feels good