Yes. Maintaining a canonical set of ports for frequently changing language-managed packages is like getting into a phonebook reprinting business. It would be a far better use of precious volunteer time for any given language package to push OS specific changes to that upstream rather than grow downstream collections. The *BSD community could also learn something from the arch AUP as a way to end-users to roll their own packages to make it easier to contribute and reduce their own deployed systems' entropy ... because having a singular ports collection is like SVN or top-down planned economies... they are labor-intensive to support and their decision making is distantly divorced from the intended use-case. Different from AUP would be human-sensible configuration management that doesn't require manual intervention or too much tweaking for deploying 1k+ nodes.