Which is why I offer it as an alternative as opposed to a replacement. Point being, for a project doing continuous delivery the idea of following the current process is a problem. Current process makes sense if you have big multifacated releases happening a couple of times a year where you can diligently track all the amazing features you are releasing and bundle it all up nice for review. Not all projects work that way. Continuous release enables you to push out a bugfix today and a useful QoL feature tomorrow. These are not all Service releases in the traditional sense, at least by the definition I understand so going through the traditional release review process represents undue burden on the project.
Ultimately, I am interested in our recommending the addition of a process to the EDP that can more accurately capture the reality of what some projects are trying to do whilst respecting the core tenets of the Eclipse Foundation which I firmly believe are rooted in demonstrable clean IP policy. All software foundations advocate processes that help make projects successful but the Eclipse Foundation is the only one that I am aware of that has a team of lawyers backing up and reviewing contributions and dependencies to ensure IP cleanliness.
cheers,
Jesse