How about “Fire” … starts with F, has immense power and gives a nice file-extension.
What about second sight? 
I think it’s pretty neat. And even if used without Fluid, TS mostly acts as some kind of connector between different worlds and I think pipes is a nice allegory.
Well, I suppose with that reasoning wormhole could also work
Neos.Pipes I think I like it after reading past it a few times.
Root.pipe
As file? then?
1 Like
yeah, Pipes / Pipe could work. What makes it a bit difficult though is that it is a plural.
Will it be a Pipes Template? or a Pipe Template? And will Germans mess it up all once again by pronouncing it German?
I also love the suggestion by @mficzel.
\Neos\Fire\FireObjects\Helpers\FireAwareViewInterface.php 
@mficzel seems to have found the option that sounds the best to me.
Neos.Fire feels better than Neos.Pipes or anything else suggested here.
Then we’ll have Flow, Fluid, Fire, Eel (If Eel had a logo it would have to be an electric eel), Fizzle, FlowQuery, Media, and TYPO3CR.
To make TYPO3CR fit with Fluid and Fire, maybe we could call it the Neos.SolidCR (liquid, gas, and plasma are all fluid states, so that leaves “solid”, though Neos.PlasmaCR has a nice ring to it as well). Content is very substantial after all 
. But this is off-topic…
1 Like
for Pipe … it’s weird in French (https://www.google.ch/search?q=pipe&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjCxvut7JrOAhWKOBQKHa1NCIwQ_AUICCgB&biw=1440&bih=802), we even have a sex oriented version of Pipe (and no, i will not post picture) and TS is not a Pipe (in the unix sense of the word).
See my message in the CR thread, I think we can have a coherant product family with this naming:
I’m in favor of having “abstract” name a not behing to descriptive in the product name.
Still have the feeling that “Fire” might be too shallow / concrete (after all, we have “Fluid” and not “Water”). So I stumbled over some variations again, which have been among the ideas when we needed to give Flow a name:
- Neos Flame or Neos Flames
- Neos Spark
What nags me still is that a fire can carry negative connotations. You don’t want to see your website go up in flames, or have some heated discussions about fire which might end up in a flame war …
(by the way, “fire” in Greek isn’t a very exciting word: fotiá)
“Kindle” would have been a nice word. A bit into that direction goes “Sparkle”.
I really like Spark but that is already an apache product. On the other hand it will be quite impossible to find something that was not already used anywhere and still is a word. So Neos.Spark would imho be a nice name.
I think we should collect the available options and just vote.
Fire is wonderful and short with relatively few tech entries on wikipedia.
Fusion might sound less dangerous, but it has more tech entries (including Adobe ColdFusion).
Along the same lines, what about energy or power?
Was bored yesterday and thought about Neos.Shape
Just because I think that’s what it does generally. You can use it to" shape your project".
Don’t know if it’s stupid or not but I quite like it.
Fire seems rather random to me. Pipes would be nice, but I guess the mentioned “language-reasons” are valid (Anyone remembers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Pipes?). Sparkle is an auto-updater tool in widespread use.
A lot of the suggestions here would be fine with me, so far Pipes was the one that stuck most. Sigh. So hard. Maybe Kabelbinder would be good?
2 Likes
The suggestion of Fusion is growing on me, though…
Fusion is also the one i’d prefer atm
http://www.adobe.com/de/products/coldfusion-family.html
That could cause trouble. Otherwise I like Fusion.
1 Like
Well, there is a clear distinction between cold and hot fusion, as well as muon-catalyzed fusion. And cold fusion, btw, rly? 
By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead, and cold fusion subsequently gained a reputation as pathological science.
Anyway, there is also https://fusion.net/, Fusion - Run Windows on Mac | VM for Mac | VMware, http://www.ford.com/cars/fusion/, https://www.fusionentertainment.com/, and probably more.
So, unless there is a direct conflict, I’d say we see this like most things in music and art: Everything exists elsewhere already, to some degree. And when doing a search for “fusion programming language” you find practically only references to ColdFusion (which is easy to differentiate, IMHO) and functional programming.
So, what if we just go for Neos Fusion and close this thread?
4 Likes
Hey Neos Team, let’s vote.
Should we rename TypoScript to “Neos Fusion” (and in practice, just “Fusion”)?
Please give your 
or 
if you’d prefer a different name or would like to continue with the discussion.