Does Acts 2:38 and Matthew 28:19 Contradict?

In the Bible, there is supposedly a contradiction based on how we must be baptized. In Acts 2:38, it seems to be saying we only should be baptized in Jesus' name while in Matthew 28:19 it says we must be baptized in the three persons of God.

Matthew 28:19

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," (Matthew 28:19 KJV).

Acts 2:38

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost," (Acts 2:38 KJV).

Adding to The Text:
There are three primary answers to this question. The first is that we are adding to what the text is actually saying. Cephas(or Peter) never says to baptize in Jesus' name alone; rather, he says to baptize in his name. The point is that there is no contradiction as Peter never denies Jesus' model, excluding detail does not mean a contradiction. For example, if a person were to say on Tuesday, "I sure love strawberries and pineapples!" and then on Wednesday, they say, "I sure love pineapples!' This does not contradict for the person in question never stated they only like pineapple, just they did not mention it.

Missing Context:

Another possible answer is the two said it differently as they had different audiences. The great commission(the task mentioned in Matthew) was meant for all nations. Simon was only speaking to a group of Jews(Acts 2:22; Acts 2:36). As the Jews know both the Father and Spirit, but reject Jesus, they only needed to be baptized in Jesus' name. A problem with this interpretation is that the Jews have a distorted view of who the Spirit is, so it would seem like they would also have to be baptized in his name.

Either Are Permitted:
A final possibility is that either method is allowed. This interpretation comes from the concept that even though they are not being baptized with all three names, they are still being baptized in one of the persons of God and thus it is valid.