Modified to work with Node 14 and latest nan

[gbkwiatt]

Modified to work with latest Node 14

[gbkwiatt]

Had to comment out rpi-version as it does not work with RPI 4

[usefulthink]

First of all, thanks a lot for your contribution - as I didn't find a lot of time to work on this, any help here is much appreciated.

I have a few questions about this though:

• would you mind keeping the package-name and all the URLs in the package.json as they are? I have absolutely no problem with you maintaining a fork (if you are interested, we can even discuss getting you to be a maintainer of the main repo somehow), but for the main repo I'd like to keep them as they are.

• about removing the hardware version-checks, I think they can go away entirely as the upstream-library now makes sure that it doesn't blow up on unsupported hardware: https://github.com/jgarff/rpi_ws281x/blob/52aff5b6dd569c82aade27f54a54508d73390eee/ws2811.c#L894-L904

• why do you remove the package-lock.json file here? Is there anything we can gain from not having it? Personally I like to keep it in my repositories.. (I never really thought about the implications either way when it comes to something like this module).

[gbkwiatt]

I was to quick with pull request, to be honest I am still finding my way around Git ;).

Not sure what I did with URLs and names, I was just experimenting trying to make it new npm package that can be easily installed, but I am new to that so ... yeah

Version check as you can see it's handled on init in C library, so probably good to just take it out completely.

I remove package-lock.json as it should be created with "npm install" so it's always generated based on current use. Not sure if that's a good approach, but previously in other projects I had issues when package.json was conflicting with package-lock.json and had to be removed priori npm install.

Regarding the whole repo, I am now not sure which one is better 1.x or 0.10.x I made both of them work with latest Node

Problem with 0.10 is that I had to change #define variables in cc file to match what I need, and also swap channel for 1 I like the minimum setup approach, and render approach from 0.10 but then I need to be able to create setup like in 1.x

I am now confused which one should I use. but I am assuming 1.x is the latest one right ?

[usefulthink]

Yeah, I was planning on adandoning/replacing the 0.10-branch a while ago. The new version has much simpler bindings (less C++). But it's not tested much yet (at least that I know of...), so I hesitated.

[usefulthink]

finally got around to integrating your changes into the 1.0-branch, see here.

If possible I would be very happy to get some feedback if this works as intended, as I currently don't have a working setup around.

Thanks again for your patch!