> Also, it's not objectively easier to make a mistake when you type one command, than when you type three.
It is; because you can pause between doing those three commands. Adding a review step objectively lowers the error rate in activities. That's why we do PRs.
> I would say my error rate goes up as I type more, so I feel it's objectively easier to make a mistake with your method.
The word you're looking for is 'subjectively', not 'objectively'.
> Also, you still haven't discussed that your method does the (in my opinion) clearly wrong thing of building whatever the current state of the master branch is, rather than a release.
Use `git clone -b`... or, use a a proper package manager with support for features like parallel binary dependencies and prebuilt binaries.
It is; because you can pause between doing those three commands. Adding a review step objectively lowers the error rate in activities. That's why we do PRs.
> I would say my error rate goes up as I type more, so I feel it's objectively easier to make a mistake with your method.
The word you're looking for is 'subjectively', not 'objectively'.
> Also, you still haven't discussed that your method does the (in my opinion) clearly wrong thing of building whatever the current state of the master branch is, rather than a release.
Use `git clone -b`... or, use a a proper package manager with support for features like parallel binary dependencies and prebuilt binaries.