pin I hate necroposting, but I think this a interesting thread and I'd like to give my 2cents on this matter.
To be honest I don't believe anymore is such projects, especially after the debacle of ArchBSD/PacBSD (or how is called right now) and of Starch Linux (OpenBSD userland on top of Linux).
I was the one (I called myself dvorak back in those days) who originally wrote their "ArchBSD on ZFS" guide on the wiki page.
They started with very interesting goals: use pacman for everything like in Linux while still maintaining the good base/third-party separation (/usr vs /usr/local), following STABLE and sticking with a pure FreeBSD approach in contrast of that toy of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD (actually they started with the same goal of Debian, but soon they decided to stick with the FreeBSD userland).
But then they started to do strange things such as packaging both of the original FreeBSD rc and OpenRC and try to maintain both of them. Just why? INIT freedom is just one of the most bull***t I ever seen in the Linux lands. No one cares about the INIT system as people just want to use their operating system. No developer should let user choices about how running their services because INIT is an internal part of an OS. If you want to change that, just fork the code and maintain it yourself. This is how everything was always done. OSes are not LEGOs. They are a complex piece of engineering that has to be tested in predictable configurations.
Soon the interest vanished and both of them are now dead.
So, when I find a project like this I'd never waste my time to fire up a VM and install it. I'll just stick with the parent project.
BSD is not Linux: you can't just wake up and creating another copycat distribution that does not adds any value, because you're going to be a dead project pretty soon. Community is just much more mature than the Linux counterparts from this point of view.