I tend to agree with Gunnar. Tools exist for this already and we're probably better served using them rather than inventing new ones.
The value proposal with this is that:
1. it's less responsibility and work for projects and reviewers, as there is a tool that automates this check in the infrastructure, so they can focus on the technical value of the change with less time spent on ECD enforcement, for the same result.
2. it's more factorized, so less overall work (1 generic Gerrit hook + 1 generic GitHub hook, instead of ~400 projects adding checks in their infra).
3. it's governed by the Foundation, who typically is the one enforcing those rules; so when the rules change, there is only this check to change and all projects would comply to new one.
If we sum all that, then it means that we have a service of higher quality, with less work from committers. Then it makes being an Eclipse Foundation project a bit more efficient and more profitable.
It seems to me like a low-hanging fruit to make the work of all committers a bit more efficient. Given the amount of committers, there is IMO a clear return on investment on this one.
