potiuk opened a new issue, #27285: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/27285
### Discussed in https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/26938 <div type='discussions-op-text'> <sup>Originally posted by **stephenonethree** October 7, 2022</sup> I just discovered the `.output` property functionality that apparently was released in Airflow 2 for classic operators, as a simple way of accessing their output XComs. I think that this is a super useful feature because it would allow simpler connections between tasks than what I have been doing until now. Until now, I've been explicitly giving a downstream task the task_ids and XCom names that it needs to pull from its upstreams (as hardcoded string parameters). Something like: ``` # pushes XCom named myvar upstream_task=SomeOperator(task_id='upstream_task') # this is a custom operator and within execute() I have a line roughly like: # actual_input = context['task_instance'].xcom_pull( # dag_id=context['dag'].dag_id, task_ids=upstream_task_id, key=upstream_xcom_name) this_task = OtherOperator( task_id='this_task', upstream_task_id='upstream_task', upstream_xcom_name='myvar' ) upstream_task >> this_task ``` With `.output` I could simplify this to: ``` # pushes XCom named myvar upstream_task=SomeOperator(task_id='upstream_task') this_task = OtherOperator( task_id='this_task', actual_input=upstream_task.output['myvar'] ) upstream_task >> this_task ``` Unfortunately it seems that there is one limitation. On the TaskFlow documentation page (https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/2.4.1/tutorial/taskflow.html#consuming-xcoms-between-decorated-and-traditional-tasks) it says: _Using the .output property as an input to another task is supported only for operator parameters listed as a template_field._ I don't use Jinja templating for very many of my parameters as it's mostly irrelevant for me. So my questions are, is there a technical reason for this limitation? If not, is this limitation something that you are considering dropping in a future Airflow version? I suppose I could just make these fields templated to get around it, but I don't really want to turn on templating if I don't expect to need it, since I suppose it introduces the possibility of incorrect interpolation (though perhaps that's a remote possibility because I don't think most of my variables will include `{{` or `}}`. Let me know if I should file this as a feature request instead, for now I guess the Ideas category works.</div> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
