Skip to content

Comparing Copier to other project generators

The subject of code scaffolding has been around for some time, and there are long established good projects.

Here's a simple comparison. If you find something wrong, please open a PR and fix these docs! We don't want to be biased, but it's easy that we tend to be:


Although Copier was born as a code scaffolding tool, it is today a code lifecycle management tool. This makes it somehow unique. Most tools below are only scaffolders and the comparison is not complete due to that.

Feature Copier Cookiecutter Yeoman
Can template file names Yes Yes Yes
Configuration Single YAML file1 Single JSON file JS module
Migrations Yes No No
Programmed in Python Python NodeJS
Requires handwriting JSON No Yes Yes
Requires installing templates separately No No Yes
Requires programming No No Yes, JS
Requires templates to have a suffix Yes by default, configurable3 No, not configurable You choose
Task hooks Yes Yes Yes
Context hooks Yes5 Yes ?
Template in a subfolder Not required, but you choose Yes, required Yes, required
Template package format Git repo2, Git bundle, folder Git or Mercurial repo, Zip file NPM package
Template updates Yes4 No No
Templating engine Jinja Jinja EJS

  1. The file itself can include other YAML files

  2. Git repo is recommended to be able to use advanced features such as template tagging and smart updates. 

  3. A suffix is required by default. Defaults to .jinja, but can be configured to use a different suffix, or to use none. 

  4. Only for Git templates, because Copier uses Git tags to obtain available versions and extract smart diffs between them. 

  5. Context hooks are provided through the ContextHook extension