Thanks, that is me still finding my way around Joplin 
I do have another suggestion for a pragmatic solution for some of the schism discussed here. A file based notebook would have another advantage; it is possible to search for note titles and contents of the note from system wide search tools outside the note app itself. I am a Mac user, so this would be Spotlight I am thinking of, but there are equivalent on other OS'ses. As far as I can tell, Joplin notes are not exposed for Spotlight which mainly looks for files. But it seems Apple has an API for hooking into databases which might make it possible (this is more a question than a fact, I'm no programmer?). If so, this would be a convenient feature to add to Joplin.
1 Like
I think the difference between our opinions is that you think it's acceptable to have metadata in files exposed to the user, and I think it's not, and indeed we'll have to agree to disagree on this one 
Or simpler, git has moved file detection and it isn't slow at all.
That's the heuristics I mentioned earlier and it's neither simple nor perfectly accurate. Git doesn't always detect that a file has been moved. And, for our purpose, if it's not 100% accurate we need to have an ID in the note file itself.
3 Likes
That's partially correct. I think it's acceptable to have notes editable outside of Joplin where metadata is visible, but inside Joplin the frontmatter would be hidden. This way things would stay the same for happy users, but the criticism from the person who started this thread would be addressed. We can agree to disagree on that. But I must emphasize this was a compromise to address the criticism of the criticism.
My actual point would be to have the option to have no metadata inside the note: The option to add a new "file based" notebook and specify its location. This way things would stay the same for happy users, but people getting access to a repository of raw text markdown notes from a friend or colleague would have the option to use their safe and comfortable preferred Joplin to manage, review and edit those notes rather than having to use some other unfamiliar software because Joplin is missing the option to work directly on files. Do you also disagree that this feature would add value to Joplin?
It has the added benefit of people like the topic starter being able to use a single "file based" notebook exclusively, while happy users won't have to. Making both audiences happy.
Every other markdown notes app out there is either one or the other. Don't you agree that it would be an attractive USP if your app could do both?
Would you say 98% of the app is about editing notes with a pleasant interface, and 2% is the storage layer? It's that 98% that people love. Wouldn't it be interesting to have the option to choose a different storage layer for a specific notebook so people can stay with the 98% they love when they collaborate on someone's repository of notes? Obviously certain features would be disabled or slower for that notebook, and you can invite the user to transfer the notes to a superior Joplin-notebook, explaining the benefits (speed and features) and drawbacks (no longer working directly on files). You can also start out with a superior Joplin-notebook and at some point in time covert it to a file-based notebook once your project is ready to be shared with multiple authors and their respective preferred editors - while still being able to contribute from within Joplin - addressing the criticism from the topic starter.
I don't think it's unrealistic.
1 Like
Yes of course, once it's in the app we can display them whichever way we want. The issue is about editing the notes outside the app.
Perhaps having an external folders with editable note files could be a plugin idea. The plugin would manage the folder and sync it with notes within Joplin.
1 Like
Funny, my view is almost exactly opposite. As an editor Joplin is ok but not outstanding. The synchronization and the variety of platforms it supports is where it shines. And this is enabled, in part, by the storage layer.
5 Likes
It's SQLite - nothing proprietary about it. The schema is easy to see and not difficult to understand.
And yet it doesn't shine for any person or group not exclusively using Joplin. What Joplin does is "selfish synchronization". It works for Joplin, but not for others. It is not editor agnostic. You can't have a folder structure with notes linking to each other, because Joplin makes a flat list of Joplin-only filenames. You can't use Joplin to collaborate on something like this.
This is good thinking. I hadn't thought about plugins. The only drawback is that while this will enable existing users, I don't think you will onboard new users (and eventually contributors) looking for a feature when said feature is only available through a third party or community plugin. They will look for a tool that natively does what they find important.
Now I don't wish to further campaign for this; I just wanted to point out that I fully empathize with the topic starter, and while I don't structurally use Joplin, I had the exact same concerns with Boostnote. Both Boostnote and Joplin are pleasant to use, but not an option when said features are your outset. Just wanted to offer my testimony.
Joplin's main focus is personal note taking and organizing, and that's fine. It's not too suitable for collaborative working in an editor agnostic environment though, and while declaring said use case to be outside the scope of Joplin is one thing, rejecting the notion is just not a very tenable position in my opinion.
1 Like
@sprague I think you might like to give Zettlr a try. It looks deceivingly simple, but the documentation is extensive. Follow the example note tutorial and enable some panels in settings.
It's not really a competitor for Joplin because it goes completely against Joplin's principles (perhaps in our case the most relevant ones being that 1 file-based data is fundamentally wrong, and 2 exposing metadata in files to the user is unacceptable).
-
It works exclusively on pure text markdown files
-
You can open multiple independent folders
-
Metadata is optional and stored as frontmatter exposed to the user, the standard compatible with Pandoc, QOwnNotes, Jekyll, go Hugo and others
It's mainly targeted towards academia and optionally connects to your favorite citation manager and LaTeX library.
It ain't no Joplin. But it ticks some of the boxes high on my list that Joplin does not. I used this script to convert ENEX to MD in a way that Zettlr likes.
2 Likes
I used http://keepnote.org before (not updated since 2012) the main advantage was, that it saved every single file as an HTML with the notes name. so you could edit/view it manually AND could search its name and text with native search w/o entering the program itself.
@all why exactly is it such a bad idea to have single files? and is there a way around to search through the notes w/o exporting them manually or entering joplin?
is there a way around to search through the notes w/o exporting them manually or entering joplin?
There's a search bar in Joplin, you can use this.
to use the search bar in joplin I have to enter joplin 
I found a suitable solution though: Backup Plugin
exports the files every few hours to searchable/editable files.
OPs post strikes with me so hard. I have used Joplin for over a year now and love it to bits. It is hands down the best Evernote replacement out there. But I am actively searching for alternatives, due to this one single issue.
That's an unfair comparison, imo. Database engines have a concept known as "sharding". Some of them have this capacity in-built and some supply it with third party tools.
I have 3GB of notes and growing. My phone has 900MB of free storage (without Joplin). You see where I am going. . .
With a file-system based note app, the process is:
- rsync the oldest notes and resources to long-term storage
- nuke the oldest notes and resources on one device
- let Joplin sync do its thing to delete them on all the others
( This means that sometimes notes and their attachments would fall out of sync, but I am fine with that tradeoff and, heck, if I made the backup script a few lines longer, it could 1) archive and delete the .md files first, 2) search the .md files while deleting the resources and only delete if no match is found. )
Fully automated, basically two line script.
With a database-backed system, the steps are:
- manually sort old notes into a separate notebook
- export the notebook, labeling it with some kind of versioning identifier
- delete and/or empty the notebook
- repeat
Fully manual process, very time consuming.
I have read all of @laurent 's posts on this topic and they make perfect sense -- but I still hope this feature will be (re)-considered for the future roadmap.
1 Like
I suppose you can use the the "All Notes" view, sort by created/updated time, select a number of notes, export them, and delete.
A plugin could do the job too - for example it could automatically move notes older than x months to a separate notebook, archive it as JEX, then delete the notebook.
Can I maybe add that besides note portability/sync/maintainability, the other core feature of note taking apps like Joplin (to me personally in any case) is search-ability. What value has taking those notes if I cannot find them later? That is where Evernote’s strength lies and where I had the hardest time finding an alternative, with Joplin and OneNote being the only ones that can be even mentioned. In my view, if there were a reason to go back to Evernote, it would be for search. (But EN is so unusably slow nowadays that it just isn’t an option to me...)
I don't understand a lot of the technical stuff in the thread, but as a past Evernote user who left due to the mess that v10 was, let me say how glad I am that the reason some people choose to use another app over Joplin is not due to problems with the core functions of a cross-platform note-taking/viewing app. Unlike EN10, I haven't experienced any problems with speed, data loss, losing previous features, etc. I can only sort of understand but fully respect that for personal reasons or matters of principle some technical aspects of Jopin might not meet some people's needs, but I think the reason people stay with Joplin (especially those coming from EN) is because it offers the best note-taking, searching, syncing experience. Once I got the hang of how Joplin/markdown works, I haven't had to think or worry about anything but creating notes (well, also adding plugins). And all this for free!
I don't know how many are like me, but I think as long as the core user experience doesn't deteriorate (the way EN did), most people will continue to enjoy using Joplin and appreciate all the user-experience improvements that show up regularly. I don't really understand the implications of a folder-based system vs. a database system. If there's a way to satisfy both needs a bit better, great! But I can't stress this enough: just don't mess up the core functionality! Joplin already offers the closest experience to EN Legacy, if not surpassing it.
13 Likes
Me! Mememememe! I have been following this thread with interest and a little bit of dread, because the last thing in the world I want is for Joplin to become some unstable geeky mess to please some tinkerers.
Luckily Laurent's head is screwed on right and he seems to have that perfect balance between listening to suggestions without losing sight of what Joplin is all about.
Well said, couldn't agree more!
10 Likes
some unstable geeky mess to please some tinkerers
Wow, how to win friends and influence people! Nice to know you have so much respect for fellow users.
4 Likes
Well I'm a borderline tinkerer and I understand what Sophia was referring to. I didn't take offence because I am sure none was intended. I didn't spot any lack of respect either.
In this particular discussion I personally think there is a lot to be said for the arguments on both sides. It is a geeky discussion though, and there's nothing wrong with that 
8 Likes
Spot on, @MisterKelly . For a more eloquent explanation I couldn't say it better than @skim1124 before my post. I'm fine with whatever feature gets added to Joplin, as long as the core remains stable and usable. That's all really.
2 Likes