Skip to content

feat(afc): gate lane eject on mounted tool - #1899

Open
unlucio wants to merge 12 commits into
fluidd-core:developfrom
unlucio:update_AFC_buttons_for_multitools
Open

feat(afc): gate lane eject on mounted tool#1899
unlucio wants to merge 12 commits into
fluidd-core:developfrom
unlucio:update_AFC_buttons_for_multitools

Conversation

@unlucio

@unlucio unlucio commented Jul 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Add an optional mounted flag to the AFC lane type and drive the lane Eject button's disabled state from it: when the backend reports it, Eject enables only for the lane whose tool is on the carrier. When mounted is absent, it falls back to the exact previous expression, so behaviour is unchanged for backends that don't report it.

This is to allow for better control of multi-tool machines.

Add an optional `mounted` flag to the AFC lane type and drive the lane
Eject button's disabled state from it: when the backend reports it, Eject
enables only for the lane whose tool is on the carrier. When `mounted` is
absent it falls back to the exact previous expression, so behaviour is
unchanged for backends that don't report it.

This is to allow for better control of multi-tool machines.

Signed-off-by: Lucio <unlucio@gmail.com>
@pedrolamas pedrolamas added this to the 1.37.3 milestone Jul 3, 2026
@pedrolamas pedrolamas added the FR - Enhancement New feature or request label Jul 3, 2026
@jimmyjon711

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@unlucio What is lane mounted? To my knowledge this is not a valid lane status that's in the official AFC-Klipper-Add-On repo.

@unlucio

unlucio commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@unlucio What is lane mounted? To my knowledge this is not a valid lane status that's in the official AFC-Klipper-Add-On repo.

It is not for AFC; I'm just using the AFC widget as UI, but for multi-tools that are not using AFC but can gain convenience and visual clarity from the same UI

scr.2026-07-04.at.03.17.29.mp4

@pedrolamas pedrolamas removed this from the 1.37.3 milestone Jul 4, 2026
@unlucio

unlucio commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@pedrolamas, since I need it for a larger thing, may I ask if this tiny thing is interesting for Fluidd or not?
It does not impact nor changes the current defaults, but it allows for more options and integrations

@pedrolamas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hi @unlucio, I don’t have a big stake in this change.

I try to focus on keeping things fully compatible with mainline Klipper, Kalico, and Moonraker - anything beyond that is usually contributed by others, and I try to make sure those developers continue maintaining their code.

That said, any changes to AFC-related code should be reviewed and approved by @jimmyjon711 since he created and maintains it, and so I reserve to him the first vote in regard to this pull request.

@jimmyjon711

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@unlucio @pedrolamas I think my first comment in this PR sums what I think about bringing in changes that are not supported in the official AFC-Klipper-Add-On. I do not think its a good idea to add code to the AFC panel for things that are "imitating" AFC just to get the panel to show. This is going to add confusion, be hard to test to verify that when changes are made they don't break this imitating code. Also this PR that reuses the eject button to dock the toolhead just for the U1 printer is just going to add confusion IMO, there is already code in AFC panel to dock/undock toolheads for toolchangers.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

FR - Enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants