SYSHUB001v2-SG03 | Update label from "IP Address" to "IP Address (without port)"

[osiastedian]

User description

Update the "IP address" label to "IP Address (without port)" to clarify that users should not include the port number, addressing confusion reported in GitHub issue #104.

The system automatically appends the correct port (:8369) when generating commands, so users only need to provide the IP address.

---

---

PR Type

Enhancement

---

Description

• Updated label for IP address input.

• Clarified input to exclude port.

• Improved user experience.

---

Diagram Walkthrough

flowchart LR
  A[MasternodeDetails.jsx] --> B{IP Address Label};
  B -- "Update" --> C[IP Address (without port)];

Loading

File Walkthrough

	Relevant files
Enhancement	MasternodeDetails.jsx Updated IP Address Input Label                                                      src/components/masternodes/masternodeForm/MasternodeDetails.jsx Changed label text from 'IP address' to 'IP Address (without port)'. Improved clarity for users entering IP addresses. +1/-1

---

[cursor]

Cursor Agent can help with this pull request. Just @cursor in comments and I'll start working on changes in this branch.
_{Learn more about Cursor Agents}

[github-actions]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Explore these optional code suggestions:

Category	Suggestion	Impact
General	Improve label clarity The label "IP Address (without port)" is unclear. Consider adding a more descriptive label that clearly explains the expected input format, such as "IP Address (e.g., 192.168.1.1)". This will improve user understanding and reduce errors. You might also want to add input validation to ensure the user enters a valid IP address. src/components/masternodes/masternodeForm/MasternodeDetails.jsx [129] -<label htmlFor="ipAddress">IP Address (without port)</label> +<label htmlFor="ipAddress">IP Address (e.g., 192.168.1.1)</label> Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5 __ Why: The suggestion improves the label by adding an example, making it clearer for the user. However, it's a minor improvement and doesn't address potential input validation issues.	Low