Is "MacPort" a valid term?

[markd at macports.org]

>>> For a long time, I thought that when people were saying port, in this
>>> discussion, I thought the were referring to a port or a tcp/ip
>>> address.
>>> like localhost:80
>>
>> Clarity is one of the reasons that in the past I frequently used
>> the term
>> "MacPorts port" (to distinguish it from FreeBSD and other port
>> systems),
>> but this is too cumbersome and inelegant when used a lot so I mostly
>> curtailed that.  Using the term "MacPort" would make the term
>> clear, but
>> is that really a valid term in current usage?  It seems we're only
>> comfortable with the plural form, and I think that is why we always
>> fall
>> back to the more generic "port" to express a single MacPorts port.
>
>Just like Apple doesn't want you to say "I wrote an
>AppleScript" (they want you to say "I wrote an AppleScript script"),
>I don't like hearing "I installed a MacPort" (I think "I installed a
>MacPorts port" is clearer).
>
>That's not to say I don't see your point too. "MacPorts port" (and
>"AppleScript script") is long and sounds silly. Would be neat if we
>could come up with a new cute term for our ports. Ruby has gems, for
>instance. What entities could MacPorts have?

Hmn.  How about "mport" as shorthand for "MacPorts port".  "MacPorts
mport" would never be used, since it is redundant.

Mark