Concur, adding that going with #3 or #2 (no preference from me formally
between the 2, you guys know better here) adds a much-needed release valve
so you don't have to make a decision about the permanent home under
pressure.
Don't know that you need a formal RFP for permanent (well, longterm shackup)
home, but even a rough Mary Poppins-style list of mandatory/highly
desired/desired deliverables ("You must be kind, you must be witty; very
sweet and fairly pretty," etc.) will help lead to good long-term decisions
and can actually accelerate the decision process.
Karen
> I agree with this. Expectations of anvil's return to duty shouldn't
> add to the pressure of getting it running again.
>
> -Ross.
>
> On 8/2/07, Kevin S. Clarke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > So, to that effect, here's what I think the current options are:
> > >
> > > 1) Get it back up on anvil
> > > 2) Get it up on Dan's Machine
> > > 3) Put it up here at OSU
> >
> > My order of preference would be #3 else #2... though Dan's machine
> > might be easier if he already has an older version on there.
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
