On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:29:53AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:25:21PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:42:41AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:00:23PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On 15
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:25:21PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:42:41AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:00:23PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 15 November 2016 at 09:42, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > > On
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:42:41AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:00:23PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 15 November 2016 at 09:42, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > >> But this I'd
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:00:23PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 15 November 2016 at 09:42, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >> But this I'd prefer to drop. We need to describe the button codes, but
> >> the key
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:00:23PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 15 November 2016 at 09:42, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >> But this I'd prefer to drop. We need to describe the button codes, but
> >> the key
Hi,
On 15 November 2016 at 09:42, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> But this I'd prefer to drop. We need to describe the button codes, but
>> the key codes are _already_ perfectly described in the keymap. Leaving
>> this
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10 November 2016 at 05:19, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > A side-note here: my first version sent to Jonas privately had a reserved
> > range for any key with the highest bit set. The idea here was to
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:22:41AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10 November 2016 at 05:19, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > A side-note here: my first version sent to Jonas privately had a reserved
> > range for any key with the highest bit set. The idea here was to
Hi,
On 10 November 2016 at 05:19, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> A side-note here: my first version sent to Jonas privately had a reserved
> range for any key with the highest bit set. The idea here was to have a
> range defined that we'll never touch during protocol updates
Because we already rely on it for xkb anyway. This is a retrofit, which is not
ideal but I'm not sure any compositor out there uses anything else. Might as
well define it.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer
---
A side-note here: my first version sent to Jonas privately had a
10 matches
Mail list logo