Is the ipynb extension off putting to non-python users?

Was wondering if the ipynb extension was off putting to non-python users (I’m a python user, so, my perspective isn’t that useful here).

HOWEVER - the reason I was thinking about this is while working on, I’ve thought about configuring Jupyter to store Rmd files instead of ipynb files, since they play better with git. And a big reason why I don’t want to do it - is because I find the Rmd extension to be off putting! Like I’m not supposed to use it cause it’s for R users

I’ve been thinking about this lately too, and I keep getting niggling thoughts about “wouldn’t start from here if I were you” where “here” is all the accumulated tutorials to date for getting started with Jupyter notebooks… (which isn’t to say they aren’t good / useful, but maybe things are moving on…).

For example, if you run Jupytext, then src files can be markdown or python flavoured (other formats are also available). The formats omit the output cell content, but they are more readable and they can be dualled with ipynb files (I haven’t checked to see if the .ipynb files can be stored in a hidden directory path and the md/py files retained at the top level).

There are also new notebook fronted environments appearing everyday, many of them with preinstalled extensions/customisations/styling etc. I can’t keep up with all of them, but I wonder: have any of those environments started employing a workflow where py/md based files are the pseudo-first class document type, using Jupytext dualling, and ipynb docs (with output state) are handled discreetly via hidden directories, etc?


Something like this extension to the jupytext formats string (which doesn’t work at the moment):


this wouldn’t be too hard to implement as a backwards compatible change, if someone wanted to add that code path.