To a driver developer, maybe; to the rest of teh world, not really. Everyone (beside you) is speaking about "Gallium3d drivers" not "Gallium3d internals API inside the Mesa driver".
I stated exactly four things:
(a) "some BSD developers have started porting the necessary kernel infrastructure"
(b) "this requires manpower"
(c) "Gallium3d is a moving target"
(d) "BSD support for modern 3d is worse than Linux"
You confirm that (a) is necessary and I recall Phoronix reporting on this work a few months ago.
You confirm that (c) is a fact. (New features may entail changes to Gallium3d, the kernel drivers and the state tracker).
(b) and (d) are conjectures based on evidence.
This is getting silly.
AFAIK there is a difference between gallium3d and kernel mode setting which does live within the linux kernel. So yes, gallium3d is a moving target, but what would be required for the various bsd's would be to port the kernel mode setting stuff to the kernel of the bsd's. As Airlied indicated the kernel mode setting stuff has been api/abi stable for years. So as I understand it the churn in the gallium3d stuff does not influence the amount of work necessary to port the kernel mode setting stuff required.
The official intel drivers do not use gallium3d, but do require kernel mode setting.
You can't use ATI cards in BSD? Well, only HD 4xxx cards work and only using the open source driver? So, if you bought an Evergreen or NI card, you can't use it at all? CLAP, CLAP... Way to go ATI/AMD! Great support. How are things with Windows these days?
If you're trying to play Battlefield3 on BSD, you're doing it wrong...