fix(learn): env var tutorial link to latest docs

[mureinik]

Description

Adjust the link in the "How to read environment variables from Node.js" tutorial to refer to the environment variables documentation added in 24.5.0.

Validation

Click on the link in the "How to read environment variables from Node.js" article and see it directs to the Environment Variables section in the API docs.

Related Issues

Fixes#7995

Check List

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines and made commit messages that follow the guideline.
• I have run pnpm format to ensure the code follows the style guide.
• I have run pnpm test to check if all tests are passing.
• I have run pnpm build to check if the website builds without errors.
• I've covered new added functionality with unit tests if necessary.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Aug 1, 2025 7:39pm

[AugustinMauroy]

Adjust the link in the "How to read environment variables from Node.js" tutorial to refer to the latest version of the API docs and not an arbitrarily link to Node.js 22's docs.

No it's not arbitrary. It's voluntary done in #7307

Why ? Because maintaining the learn section is complicated. So do not have broken docs/exmaple we decide to ping it to a version. this sub section use 22

Why not update it to 24 but you have to verify everything.

Also for more context take a look at https://nodejs.org/en/blog/events/collab-summit-2024-dublin#documentation-improvements-nodejs-learn-section

[avivkeller]

I disagree. We should always use the latest version of the documentation. The articles should be updated over time, yes, but we shouldn't assume the user is on a version that isn't the latest.

[AugustinMauroy]

My idea at the time, but I never tried to implement it, was to have a semver range in the frontmatter of the display in some way in the metabar. And then to have an MDX component that links the docs.

I disagree. We should always use the latest version of the documentation. The articles should be updated over time, yes, but we shouldn't assume the user is on a version that isn't the latest.

I would like to think like you, but to apply that, Node would have to have no breaking changes or deprecations.

[mureinik]

nodejs/node#59052 was merged, but the changes it made to the API docs will only become visible with the next release (presumably 24.5.0?).

I don't want to update this PR to reference it to avoid accidental premature merging that will result in a broken link. Once the next version of the API docs is live, I'll circle back and update this MR to point to the new Environment Variabels section.

[mureinik]

Now that Node.js 24.5.0 has been released, the PR is updated to refer to the newly added "Environment Variables" section in the API docs, as per the discussion above.

[avivkeller]

The discussion on what version links to be used can be had separately, but this, itself, LGTM

[avivkeller]

@AugustinMauroy@dario-piotrowicz Please re-review and merge when ready

[github-actions]

Lighthouse Results

URL	Performance	Accessibility	Best Practices	SEO	Report
/en	🔴 71	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 100	🔗
/en/about	🟢 100	🟢 97	🟢 100	🟠 88	🔗
/en/about/previous-releases	🟢 99	🟢 93	🟢 100	🟠 89	🔗
/en/download	🟢 92	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 100	🔗
/en/blog	🟢 100	🟢 100	🟢 96	🟢 100	🔗

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 73.04%. Comparing base (8194265) to head (34a174b).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #7996 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 72.98% 73.04% +0.06% 
==========================================
Files 95 95 Lines 8324 8324 Branches 215 214 -1 ==========================================
+ Hits 6075 6080 +5 + Misses 2248 2243 -5 
Partials 1 1 

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[dario-piotrowicz]

Looks good to me 🙂

Thanks @mureinik 😄 (and sorry for the late review 🙇)

[mureinik]

@dario-piotrowicz no worries!