Add support for optional DisplayName in NodeSet2.xml #2630
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
See #2627 With this commit we support optional display name in the NodeSet2.xml. If it is not given, we take the name part of the BrowseName.
Pro
changed the title
|
1.04. But good to see that we work on the master node set as well. |
|
Looks good. Some things to look at: Tabs and spaces after if-conditions.. We remove nodes for historic data and events. Are these features tested in the CI? Maybe we can have feature-based minimal node sets that we pull in on request. |
Scratch that. We already have |
|
Closing this in favour of #2639. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #2627
With this commit we support optional display name in the NodeSet2.xml.
If it is not given, we take the name part of the BrowseName.
NOTE: This PR changes the ua-nodeset submodule from the relase branch 1.04 to the current master.
@jpfr do we want to use the 1.04 branch, or current master branch for the nodeset?