Repository navigation
Consider supporting .jinja2 extensions across the project #8603
Description
Description
At the moment, various operators support reading templates from given filenames (for example, bash_command of BashOperator). However, all of these operators specify extensions such as .sh, .json etc., so it means users need to write Jinja2 templates inside .sh, .json files. A better way to do it would be supporting the .jinja2 extension.
Use case / motivation
The motivation is threefold:
.jinja2extension is a widespread convention which is supported by various editors, including Github itself, PyCharm and VSCode.- Putting templates inside
.jinja2can help distinguish between regular files and template files just by looking at the directory contents - Working with tools that recognize
.jinja2templates can help reduce errors while authoring templates.
Related Issues
Reacted by Kamil Breguła
Activity
boring-cyborg commentedon Apr 28, 2020
Thanks for opening your first issue here! Be sure to follow the issue template!
mik-laj commentedon Apr 28, 2020
Hi.
It looks good. I think we can accept jinja2 whenever template ext is not empty.
Do you want to work on it? Should I assign you to this ticket?
Best regards,
Kamil
oripwk commentedon Apr 28, 2020
Hi,
Yes, I can work on it. You can assign
Add support for .jinja2 extensions
potiuk commentedon Apr 29, 2020
Hey @oripwk. I generally like the idea, but can you also write about this one on the devlist?
I think this is quite a fundamental change int the approach for potentially many operators, and I feel we should have more people commenting on it and maybe coming up with some ideas how to handle it well. I think for example that better approach will be to simply support additional .jinja2 extension when you have extensions defined. For example when you have '.sh' extension in template extensions, you'd look in both
*.shand*.sh.jinja2but not just*.jinja2. This way we might preserve both - nice formatting support from IDE's and semantic information about the actual type of the file. But this is just my opinion and maybe we can discuss it at the devlist.Woudl you be so kind to write about the proposal at the devlist please ?
oripwk commentedon Apr 29, 2020
Sure.
I also commented on the PR regarding how to generate documentation for this, since it affects many operators. Do you have any suggestion how to deal with it? #8616 (comment)
eladkal commentedon May 5, 2021
@kaxil this issue should be resolved by #14603 correct?
kaxil commentedon May 6, 2021
No, actually this is a bit different i.e. the OP wants to allow using "file.jinja2" instead of "file.bash" or "file.sql" in rendered template fields.
uranusjr commentedon Jul 31, 2024
This would be irrelevant if AIP-80 is accepted. Instead of inferring from the extension, you’d need to pass in a FileTemplate class explicitly, which can accept any file name.
bugraoz93 commentedon Mar 16, 2025
Are we going to make this happen? I suggest we move to 3.1+ otherwise :)
uranusjr commentedon Apr 8, 2025
Yes this should be moved to 3.1.
potiuk commentedon Mar 2, 2026
@oripwk We are unassigning you from this issue as part of our updated assignment policy.
This is not meant to discourage your contribution — quite the opposite! You are still very welcome to work on this issue and submit a PR for it. Simply comment that you are working on it and open a PR when ready.
We found that formal assignments were not working well, as they often prevented others from contributing when the assignee was not actively working on the issue.
amoghrajesh commentedon Mar 25, 2026
Since this has not yet been picked up and we are approaching the 3.2 release, I am moving it to the 3.3 milestone.