FIX: fixed gamepad navigation in UI Toolkit TextField [6000.1]

[benoitalain]

Description

6000.1 backport of #2103

Fixed UUM-77364: fixed gamepad navigation in UI Toolkit TextField when using InputSystemUIInputModule.

Testing status & QA

Tested that the fixed code runs on 6000.1.0b9 as well as 6000.2.0a6.

Overall Product Risks

• Complexity: 0
• Halo Effect: 1

Comments to reviewers

This PR is only modifying the asmdef define constraints. The code changes have already landed earlier, we just need to enable them for 6000.1 as well.

No changelog entry. The fix was already landed and mentioned in the changelog, and doesn't mention that it only applied to 6000.2 prior to this backport.

Checklist

Before review:

• Changelog entry added.
  • Explains the change in Changed, Fixed, Added sections.
  • For API change contains an example snippet and/or migration example.
  • JIRA ticket linked, example (case %%). If it is a private issue, just add the case ID without a link.
  • Jira port for the next release set as "Resolved".
• Tests added/changed, if applicable.
  • Functional tests Area_CanDoX, Area_CanDoX_EvenIfYIsTheCase, Area_WhenIDoX_AndYHappens_ThisIsTheResult.
  • Performance tests.
  • Integration tests.
• Docs for new/changed API's.
  • Xmldoc cross references are set correctly.
  • Added explanation how the API works.
  • Usage code examples added.
  • The manual is updated, if needed.

During merge:

• Commit message for squash-merge is prefixed with one of the list:
  • NEW: ___.
  • FIX: ___.
  • DOCS: ___.
  • CHANGE: ___.
  • RELEASE: 1.1.0-preview.3.

After merge:

• Create forward/backward port if needed. If you are blocked from creating a forward port now please add a task to ISX-1444.

[ekcoh]

@benoitalain This is purely symbols but do you think a CHANGELOG entry would be appropriate or not? I noticed there was none on the diff.

[benoitalain]

No changelog entry. The fix was already landed and mentioned in the changelog, and doesn't mention that it only applied to 6000.2 prior to this backport.

I thought I shouldn't, as I said in my PR description's comment to reviewers:

No changelog entry. The fix was already landed and mentioned in the changelog, and doesn't mention that it only applied to 6000.2 prior to this backport.

Do you think this is reasonable? I don't really know what I'd say besides just restating that this bug is fixed (which is already said) and maybe mentioning that we now cover 6.1 as well. Feels like noise and not all that helpful, but maybe that's just me.