# 🎉 Node-RED 5.0.0 Beta 6 available

**URL:** <https://discourse.nodered.org/t/node-red-5-0-0-beta-6-available/100878>\
**Category:** News\
**Tags:** docker\
**Created:** [30 April 2026 16:36 UTC](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/node-red-5-0-0-beta-6-available/100878 "2026-04-30T16:36:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 58

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Steve-Mcl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex026/user_avatar/discourse.nodered.org/steve-mcl/32/4826_2.png) [@Steve-Mcl](https://discourse.nodered.org/u/Steve-Mcl)\
**Post date:** [2 May 2026 15:27 UTC](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/node-red-5-0-0-beta-6-available/100878/58 "2026-05-02T15:27:37Z")

</div>

> [@Steve-Mcl](#):
>
> Looking forward to the replies.

Lets go...

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> visual inconsistency

Catch nodes, complete nodes, status nodes, even MQTT in nodes could be considered the same.

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> hidden data flows

Not really, it promotes (or at least offers formalised support for) calling reusable flows.

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> extra bug searching looking for linkcalls in function nodes

Search is a users friend.

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex026/uploads/nodered/original/3X/6/9/694d49f9fea4bb5a130aa0fdc0ee53187f608279.png)

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> breaking backward compatibility

`junctions`, `node.done()`, `node.path`, env vars in a tab, env vars in global flow, etc.

Break eggs, make omelettes (or stay on V1 forever ;))

If a user does import a flow using this feature, they will see `TypeError: node.linkcall is not a function`. A forum or internet search will lead to the cause. Then they upgrade or use workarounds.

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> I don’t understand your hand waving _trust me_

Trust me bro!

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> _i don’t want to add too many nodes to my flows_.

Not what I said but...

A way of calling functions (and flows/nodes) has been requested many times on the forum and other places.

The reason/rationale for the introduction of this is to offer a familiar / standardised design pattern that everyone can use (or not) in those times they are inside code execution and want to call out to common reusable code (or flow) routine.

The preference is still always use wires where sensible, but when the wiring logic and overhead becomes too complicated, there is now another option.

> [@gregorius](#):
>
> Every problem you have raised, have working alternatives, yet you say that you need this and therefore NR has to be changed for everyone.

Again, I never said I "need this" and as already stated, I already have a working solution, but it is my implementation, using methods that completely _bend the rules_ and is even more opaque than the a formalised feature like `node.linkcall` is offering.

So here is a more complete flow that demonstrates why I went to the effort of starting a discussion with proposals and then implemented a solution to formalise a _better_ way of making & using utility functions (and flows) from within function code execution.

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex026/uploads/nodered/original/3X/2/2/224172c14a18a2a1e315d084de4ab8c52cf66b1b.png)

[node-linkcall-demo.json](https://discourse.nodered.org/uploads/short-url/rtkrZIc2EwZ7eIvuZw030f1I5tE.json) (59.2 KB)

Note again for clarity, I have solved this already (running on Node-RED v4 without `node.linkcall`) but it is a drag, its brittle, opaque, hard to follow & is my own implementation - so I am genuinely interested to see how others would approach this in a visual/wired way.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/node-red-5-0-0-beta-6-available/100878)._