And that last sentence makes it obvious why he's using the past tense. Systemtap is in his past. When it was last committed to is irrelevant.
If I was feeling less gracious, I might call into question whether you actually have no horse in this race, as apparently calling other people's motives and statements into question is apparently fair game for this thread.
It might have been clear had it been used to set the tone. But used like this I think it deserves criticism whether intentional or not.
While I certainly can be be wrong, I also wasn't assured it wasn't intentional by the way it was explained. I suggest we all mind phrasing and get along this way.
P.S. I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat.
> I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat.
I wasn't. I was using the idea that someone could imply that to point out your own behavior. That you took it as negatively as you did and assumed there was some deeper implication was the point (that is, that you could, not that it was intended). The only thing you didn't do is connect it to your own behavior in your prior comment.
I never denied that I have made an implication. I believe I had better grounds for it (or I wouldn't have invested time in checking the project's state in the first place), provided a clearer point for OP to counter, and that that my tone was not as provokative.
If you can imagine a more tactful yet still effective alternative deterrent, I'm open to suggestions. I don't believe that just pointing out the fact of the use of the inappropriate tense would have been enough.