The README refers to github releases for downloading released sources, but that only allows downloading an automatically generated git snapshot.
The generated source bundle is different (includes md5sums, maybe other differences too). This is uploaded to S3 for download through openttd.org (I think), but perhaps it should be uploaded as a release asset to github too?
What's wrong with the OGFX-source on cdn.openttd.org ?
Nothing, I guess, when it's properly documented. Looking at the README again, it does seem it references cdn.openttd.org, so that's actually fine. Maybe I created this issue in response to "or obtain the tarball from the release page" on "4.2 Obtaining the source", but reading that again it seems that that is in the context of contributing and development, where it makes some sense to just get a tarball of the git repo rather than a preprocessed release.
There's still the argument to have everything together here in GH, which might make it easier to find by just heading over to the releases page without combing through the README for the link, but it's also fine to leave as-is (so feel free to close this).
I kinda agree with you @matthijskooijman that it is pretty common to also distribute binaries etc on GH. People look there, and it is a bit frustrating to find it if you are known to the GH way of doing things.
This is the same for all our other projects btw; I guess mostly it requires someone figuring out how to publish files nicely to GH via our workflow :)
You are right @matthijskooijman , that works for OpenGFX and friends. When I tried this for OpenTTD, I ran into issues that the default action was too limited. But that shouldn't hold us back indeed :)
It's not especially difficult to add it (I can basically copy the NML version), it's a question of whether we should add it
In my opinion: yes. It is a very small effort for us, and it does confuse people. Especially as GitHub doesn't allow a "look here for binaries". The alternative is to add it to every release, where to find it, but that sounds like a lot of work to me :D I love automation!
Additionally, it means GitHub makes the cost, instead of us :D (cheapskate!)