R – Continuous Integration: PowerShell vs. CI Server (CC.NET or Hudson)

So, a friend and I have been discussing continuous integration and bat/powershell scripts versus CI servers like CruiseControl.Net or Hudson.

The following powershell pseudo script works to update from SVN, build using msbuild, deploy/copy out, update a build/revision number in the app, and emails on failed builds. The next step would be to add calls to MSTest and email results when not successful.

1. svn update
2. msbuild > build_deploy_development_out_msbuild
3. ([xml](svn info –xml)).info.entry.commit.revision + [char]13 + [char]10 + (echo %date% %time%) > build_revision_number.html
4. $linenumber = Select-String build_deploy_development_out_msbuild -pattern "Build Failed" | Select-Object Linenumber
5. $smtp = New-Object System.Net.Mail.SMTPClient -ArgumentList localhost | if($linenumber > 0) $smtp.Send("From:Email","To:Email", "build failed", "build failed… some one must die!")

This has lead me to the question of the value of CI servers, when you can write your own shell scripts to accomplish the same goal, using the specific tools of the project (build tool, source control, unit testing) (i.e. msbuild, nant, svn, git, nunit, mstest, etc.)

I have not experienced the maintenance cost as of yet. I wanted to get others opinions on the roll your own shell script versus a CruiseControl.Net or Hudson. Please note, I do not have experience with CI servers, thus the question, so please don't take this as being critical of CI servers; I simply don't know the best answer, and thought I would ask the community.

Best wishes!
Pete Gordon