What's your point? In practice, people doing work on solid research infrastructure code don't get social or financial support, don't get tenure, often can't keep academic jobs, and typically end up giving up and switching to (highly paid and better respected) industry work. Sometimes that code ends up supported as someone's part-time hobby project. If you hunt around you can find this discussed repeatedly, sometimes bitterly. Some of the most important infrastructure projects end up abandoned, with no maintainers.
In practice, most research code (including supposedly reusable components) ends up getting written in a slipshod ad-hoc way by grad students with high turnover. It typically has poor choice of basic abstractions, poor documentation, limited testing, regressions from version to version, etc. Researchers make do with what they can, and mainly focus on their written (journal paper) output rather than the quality or project health of the code.
In practice, most research code (including supposedly reusable components) ends up getting written in a slipshod ad-hoc way by grad students with high turnover. It typically has poor choice of basic abstractions, poor documentation, limited testing, regressions from version to version, etc. Researchers make do with what they can, and mainly focus on their written (journal paper) output rather than the quality or project health of the code.