I think we can proceed with this. It prevents deeper problems which are more difficult to address from arising. If it considered too aggressive, I could implement a messagebox that warns the user and asks if they want to continue at their own risk, but this will be more involved.

Let me know what you prefer @zacsimile.

Should we want the option to have the user proceed with the acquisition after being warned, I would do tkinter.messagebox.askyesno popup. The popup would be triggered by passing a message to the controller, which would make the message box top-level. The model would have to go into a waiting loop while the user interacts with the message box. Then, depending on what the user inputs, we would have to pass the result back from the controller to the model and ultimately the image writer object to break the waiting loop.

I think we only need the message box if this commit prevents us from acquiring data in cases where there is sufficient free space. If this PR works on two different microscopes, I think we're clear to merge. Also need to fix a failing test on the Sutter filter wheel.

I'll fix the test. We can test it out on CT-ASLM-V1, V2, and BT-MesoSPIM.

Codecov Report

Merging #625 (25a67c8) into develop (56b4533) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
Report is 25 commits behind head on develop.
The diff coverage is 25.71%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #625      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    48.06%   48.10%   +0.03%     
===========================================
  Files          161      160       -1     
  Lines        16721    16702      -19     
===========================================
- Hits          8037     8034       -3     
+ Misses        8684     8668      -16     

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes