What’s the problem with running a script this way? Several major tools install like this (docker, netdata...) here’s a take on this that was posted to HN a while back: https://www.arp242.net/curl-to-sh.html

Discounting an entire tool just because you don't like their recommended installation method (which you're hardly forced to use) sounds rather strange to me.

I think you should reconsider. Curl-bashing (or curl-kshing or whatever) at least ties the download to a domain name in control of the project and uses https. The alternatives - such as serving up a .deb or .rpm with a digest - aren't a good fit when the whole point of a project is to provide a single portable shell script (ok it's only a bash script), and especially when the project itself is acting as an installer of sorts, like this one. Would you rather have dozens of aviary.sh scripts with different versions and potentially malicious modifications flying around on github and download sites?