MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414586197 · doi:10.1002/spe.70024

Project Templating and Onboarding With Cookiecutter: Foundations, Uses, and Guidelines

2025· article· en· W4414586197 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsTelus (Canada)Queen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsOnboardingContext (archaeology)Python (programming language)Web applicationSoftwareQuality (philosophy)Metadata

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives Cookiecutter is a popular, mature open‐source Python library for automating the creation of customized projects from templates. This kind of scaffolding is useful for enabling reuse, encapsulating expertise, achieve uniformity, and facilitating project creation for a range of languages and domains, including microservices, web applications, and data science. Despite their success, there is a lack of descriptions of general‐purpose project templating tools such as Cookiecutter in the literature. The objective of the paper is to provide a description of Cookiecutter that is useful for researchers and practitioners. Methods Our work is informed by our own use of Cookiecutter in the context of an industrial project. We describe Cookiecutter with the help of four different research questions. The first two relate to how Cookiecutter works (RQ1) and how it is used (RQ2). The latter two are concerned with providing guidance to users of Cookiecutter (RQ3) and identifying challenges that they may face (RQ4). Result Our answer to question RQ1 provides a succinct, high‐level description of the structure of Cookiecutter templates and Cookiecutter's execution semantics. For question RQ2, we provide an analysis of the 100 most popular Cookiecutter templates on GitHub and descriptions of three applications of Cookiecutter in different domains. For question RQ3, we identify quality attributes for Cookiecutter projects together with best practice recommendations. For question RQ4, our discussion of challenges is structured around different lifecycle activities related to the overall management of Cookiecutter templates. The potential for research results in related areas such as software product lines, feature and variability modeling, and model‐driven engineering to help address these challenges is highlighted. Conclusion The paper provides a comprehensive discussion of Cookiecutter, a successful general‐purpose project templating tool with demonstrated industrial use. The discussion covers fundamental and practical aspects of Cookiecutter and thus targets practitioners as well as researchers interested in general‐purpose templating and Cookiecutter in particular.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it