Re-implement patch for horizontal scrolling and extra mouse buttons #391
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
Signed-off-by: Evan Maddock <maddock.evan@vivaldi.net>
p12tic
reviewed
Aug 6, 2019
p12tic
reviewed
Aug 6, 2019
p12tic
reviewed
Aug 6, 2019
p12tic
requested changes
Aug 6, 2019
Signed-off-by: Evan Maddock <maddock.evan@vivaldi.net>
Signed-off-by: Evan Maddock <maddock.evan@vivaldi.net>
|
Any other input on this so far? |
p12tic
approved these changes
Aug 22, 2019
|
@AdrianKoshka : This PR is good to go. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Re-implementation of #242 for the newer CI's and an up to date codebase. Both horizontal scrolling and extra mouse buttons (buttons 4 and 5, sometimes also referred to as forward and back) have been tested between Windows 10 and Linux (Solus OS). I don't have any macOS devices, so if someone wants to build this to test that platform, that might be a good idea.
Aside from some formatting and a couple of additional comments, there are no significant changes from the original work done in the previous PR.
Fixes #51