In response to using the ports collection:
I think it might be good to look into self-publishing the port/package. Although the ports collection is probably the most accepted way to package/publish, there are a number of other software developers that simply build their own ports and packages without going through the centralized ports collection.
Self-publishing a port/package would help avoid the nightmare that is sometimes involved in becoming a Committer or Maintainer. It might also allow the specific application of Makefile options that, I imagine, will be necessary to get all of the dependent packages work together correctly.
A suggestion might be to use an assembled package or port of all the dependent components. This might allow for more customization versus standard ports/packages. Tweaking or specifying Makefile or other scriptable (Perl, shell, etc.) options can be a pain. For example, Apache 2.X with SuExec, PHP4 and Perl/PHP/Python components for MySQL, is a pain on FreeBSD 5.4 although I have not tried it on 6. These packages might then all be assembled as in a single dependency-checked custom port for installation. It would be helpful to have both packages and ports available as a locally compiled port can sometimes out-perform a prebuilt package when using a custom Kernel and specific Makefile options.
A handy link (if you don't already have it):
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/ Check out the "porters-handbook".
Sorry to ramble...