Tighten up the content regarding releases

I believe that we can remove the exceptions from the Releases section. The notions of integration and nightly builds, and milestones and release candidates, are not universal and -- I believe -- not necessary. Progress reviews grant the ability for projects to make as many releases as they need to for a year: the nature of the releases is unimportant.

The passage references the Apache Software Foundation's FAQ on the topic (which I think we can remove). Our practices vary: for one, we don't require that projects use our downloads server. Many publish releases on GitHub, Maven Central, NPMJS, and other software repositories.

Whether or not something is a "release" is very much a state of mind. When the software is intended for distribution to a general audience, it is a "release"; when the intention is to make the software available internally or to a subset of the community for testing, then it is not a "release". The same set of distribution channels is used both for releases and non-releases. It is up to the project to distinguish between the two.

The IP Policy makes use of the notion of releases, so we should be careful with these changes. Releases are used to define distribution, which imposes certain requirements on an Eclipse project. Specifically:

“Distribute” (and “Distributed” when used in the past tense) is the act of making Content available via a Release.

“Release” is a collection of Project artifacts intended for distribution beyond the Project Developers

“Distributed Content” is Content (other than Hosted Content) Distributed by the Eclipse Foundation in a manner consistent with this Intellectual Property Policy. Distributed Content may include Project Content and Third Party Content that is distributed with an intention for adoption by the general community independent of the actual means of distribution (e.g. content distributed via Maven Central).

There's more. This is an oversimplification, but it boils down to a requirement that project content that is included in a release that requires vetting via the IP Due Diligence Process has been vetted along with all third party content included in or referenced by the software. I still don't believe that the exceptions provide value.

Releases (and release reviews) are also important in the Eclipse Foundation Specification Process.