I assume that "Notes" was killed for 3.0 to streamline the application, together with other stuff such as Emblems. If I am right: It will not come back.

If that is the case, then it might be worth removing the emblem on files that previously had notes.

Also, by way of comment, the ultimately streamlined computational experience is one where the computer is off - perhaps just remove all functionality from nautilus?

(In reply to comment #2)
> If that is the case, then it might be worth removing the emblem on files that
> previously had notes.

Not really, as that would remove metadata that could still be used by a Nautilus extension.

> Also, by way of comment, the ultimately streamlined computational experience is
> one where the computer is off - perhaps just remove all functionality from
> nautilus?

You are free to fork Nautilus and GNOME or remove the electricity plug from your computer if you consider it useful. Rather offtopic for this report though.

>Not really, as that would remove metadata that could still be used by a
Nautilus extension.

OK. So in the interim, how is the metadata stored so I can retrieve the notes that nautilus will now not show me?

>You are free to fork Nautilus and GNOME or remove the electricity plug from
your computer if you consider it useful.

I think the point is that it would not be useful, and the 'you can fork it' is a rather tired refrain.

>Rather offtopic for this report though.

Not at all, I'm making the point that utility and 'streamlining' are orthogonal concepts, one has value, the other only in the context of easing access to utility that does exist. This is key to discussion of a design bug. How I said it may have been better, but ultimately it is relevant.

Thanks for the bug report, I now pushed a series of fixes for this bug to git master.

Emblems added by extensions are now always visible, no matter the icon name, where emblems that come from metadata are subject to a blacklist the note emblem is now part of. The notes themselves are still stored in the gvfs metadata as always (you can read them with gvfs-info), this is only about avoid exposing the emblem.

I'm not interested in having sarcastic discussion about usability and computers turned off in this forum.

Thank you for fixing this so promptly.

The point I was making (again perhaps harshly - though I'd say 'you can fork it' is a sarcastic comment in a similar vein) was that there are design issues that are ignored by silently dropping a feature (before submitting the bug I checked the changelog and could find no obvious mention). Further, I could find no docs that explained where the notes are stored (the sarcastic 'as always' implies that this is common knowledge - this may well be true for GNOME devs, but that set is a small proportion of the GNOME user base).

Thank you for pointing to gvfs-info, I will use that.

(In reply to comment #6)
> Thank you for fixing this so promptly.
> 
> The point I was making (again perhaps harshly - though I'd say 'you can fork
> it' is a sarcastic comment in a similar vein) was that there are design issues
> that are ignored by silently dropping a feature (before submitting the bug I
> checked the changelog and could find no obvious mention). Further, I could find
> no docs that explained where the notes are stored (the sarcastic 'as always'
> implies that this is common knowledge - this may well be true for GNOME devs,
> but that set is a small proportion of the GNOME user base).
> 
> Thank you for pointing to gvfs-info, I will use that.

You're welcome...I just wanted to add the feature was not silently dropped - its removal was announced with a mail to nautilus-list@gnome.org [1].

Also, if you're interested in the technical details about how the gvfs metadata storage works, [2] is a great post from the developer who wrote the system.

[1] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/nautilus-list/2010-July/msg00023.html
[2] http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2009/06/24/data-about-data/