Return files destination uris in all ToGCS operators

[FHoffmannCode]

Description

Currently some storage operators return files destination uris list for example GoogleSheetsToGCSOperator. It would be a good idea to make all of such operators to return this list.

Use case / motivation

1. Having list of destination uris for files transferred with operator is useful for debugging and troubleshooting
2. Inconsistent operator behaviour might be confusing for users.

Edit (by @shahar1 on Jan. 31, 2026)
For operators that currently return a single entity, add the flag unwrap_single which controls whether the returned value is either list[obj] or obj (usually obj is str but could also be a dict). Until we apply consistency for all operators (unwrap_single=False), which will be a breaking change - set for now the default to return the single entity (unwrap_single=True).

Tracking (added by @shahar1 on Jan. 24, 2026)

All operators should return list[str] of destination URIs (gs://bucket/object).

To Do (Generated by AI, please double check if current situation is as described)

• ADLSToGCSOperator (transfers/adls_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: list[str] (ADLS source paths) → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @Abhishekmishra2808 | PR: Return destination GCS URIs from ADLSToGCSOperator #61463

• AzureFileShareToGCSOperator (transfers/azure_fileshare_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: list[str] (source filenames) → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @nailo2c | PR: Return list of GCS URIs from Azure*ToGCS operators #61048

• AzureBlobStorageToGCSOperator (transfers/azure_blob_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: str → Need: list[str] (wrap in list)
  • Assignee: @nailo2c | PR: Return list of GCS URIs from Azure*ToGCS operators #61048

• GCSToGCSOperator (transfers/gcs_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: None → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @yuseok89 | PR: Return list of destination URIs from GCSToGCSOperator #61320

• LocalFilesystemToGCSOperator (transfers/local_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: None → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @yuseok89 | PR: Return list of destination URIs from LocalFilesystemToGCSOperator #61355

• GoogleDriveToGCSOperator (transfers/gdrive_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: Inconsistent → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @Ajay9704 | PR: Return files destination uris in GoogleDriverToGCSOperator and SheetsToGCSOperator #61347

• HttpToGCSOperator (transfers/http_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: None → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @Srabasti | PR: Return list of destination URIs from HttpToGCSOperator #61306

• FacebookAdsReportToGcsOperator (transfers/facebook_ads_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: None → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @Abhishekmishra2808 | PR: : Return list of GCS URIs from FacebookAdsReportToGcsOperator #61349

• GoogleCalendarToGCSOperator (transfers/calendar_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: object name (not full URI) → Need: full gs:// URIs
  • Assignee: @Ajay9704 | PR: GoogleCalendarToGCSOperator: add unwrap_single flag and return full GCS URIs #61284

• GoogleSheetsToGCSOperator (transfers/sheets_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: list[str] (object names only) → Need: full gs:// URIs
  • Assignee: @Ajay9704 | PR: Return files destination uris in GoogleDriverToGCSOperator and SheetsToGCSOperator #61347

• SalesforceToGcsOperator (transfers/salesforce_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: str → Need: list[str] (wrap in list)
  • Assignee: @Prab-27 | PR: Return list of GCS URIs from SalesforceToGcsOperator #61659

• GoogleAdsToGcsOperator (ads/transfers/ads_to_gcs.py)

  • Current: None → Need: destination URIs
  • Assignee: @Abhishekmishra2808 | PR: Return GCS URIs from GoogleAdsToGcsOperator for Issue #11323 #61334

• GoogleDisplayVideo360SDFtoGCSOperator (marketing_platform/operators/display_video.py)

  • Current: non-list / non-URI → Need: full gs:// URIs
  • Assignee: @Ajay9704 | PR: GoogleDisplayVideo360SDFtoGCSOperator: add unwrap_single flag #61709

• S3ToGcsOperator (cloud/transfers/s3_to_gcs.py‎)

  • Need: adjustments to deferrable mode.
  • Assignee: @AlexisBRENON | PR: In S3ToGcsOperator return the list of copied files even in deferrable mode #49768

[boring-cyborg]

Thanks for opening your first issue here! Be sure to follow the issue template!

[eladkal]

This issue spawn from #10991 (comment)
It probably can be useful but it's also a breaking change and so far I didn't see users complaining about it.
Could you please clarify the TODO part on this issue?
What operators need adjustments? Is it localized to GCP or also other providers?

[uranusjr]

Yeah I don’t see how this could break user code in practice. Should be doable.

[potiuk]

Yeah. Nice feature to add. Would you like to implement it @FHoffmannCode ? Should I assign it to you ?

[eladkal]

Yeah I don’t see how this could break user code in practice.

The suggestion was to change the returned value to make operators consistent. If changed then the value pushed to xcom is not as users are expecting.

[uranusjr]

It depends on what are correctly being returned; I’m assuming most (if not all) are currently returning None, which won’t have backward compatibility issues (except if someone is depending on an XCom is not pushed, but why would anyone do that). Are there instances of an operator currently pushing something else?

[potiuk]

Yeah. Same here. I think it's no harm to return "more".

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no response from the author. It will be closed in next 7 days if no further activity occurs from the issue author.