What is the purpose of a dedicated "Build Server"? [closed]

The reason given is actually a huge benefit. Builds that go to QA should only ever come from a system that builds only from the repository. This way build packages are reproducible and traceable. Developers manually building code for anything except their own testing is dangerous. Too much risk of stuff not getting checked in, being out of date with other people's changes, etc. etc.

Joel Spolsky on this matter.


Build servers are important for several reasons.

  • They isolate the environment The local Code Monkey developer says "It compiles on my machine" when it won't compile on yours. This can mean out-of-sync check-ins or it could mean a dependent library is missing. Jar hell isn't near as bad as .dll hell; either way, using a build server is cheap insurance that your builds won't mysteriously fail or package the wrong libraries by mistake.

  • They focus the tasks associated with builds. This includes updating the build tag, creating any distribution packaging, running automated tests, creating and distributing build reports. Automation is the key.

  • They coordinate (distributed) development. The standard case is where multiple developers are working on the same code base. The version control system is the heart of this sort of distributed development but depending on the tool, the developers may not interact with each other's code much. Instead of forcing developers to risk bad builds or worry about merging code overly aggressively, design the build process where the automated build can see the appropriate code and processes the build artifacts in a predictable way. That way when a developer commits something with a problem, like not checking in a new file dependency, they can be notified quickly. Doing this in a staged area let's you flag the code that has built so that developers don't pull code that would break their local build. PVCS did this quite well using the idea of promotion groups. Clearcase could do it too using labels but would require more process administration than a lot of shops care to provide.


What is their purpose?
Take load of developer machines, provide a stable, reproducible environment for builds.

Why aren't the developers building the project on their local machines, or are they?
Because with complex software, amazingly many things can go wrong when just "compiling through". problems I have actually encountered:

  • incomplete dependency checks of different kinds, resulting in binaries not being updated.
  • Publish commands failing silently, the error message in the log ignored.
  • Build including local sources not yet commited to source control (fortunately, no "damn customers" message boxes yet..).
  • When trying to avoid above problem by building from another folder, some files picked from the wrong folder.
  • Target folder where binaries are aggregated contains additional stale developer files that shoulkd not be included in release

We've got an amazing stability increase since all public releases start with a get from source control onto an empty folder. Before, there were lots of "funny problems" that "went away when Joe gave me a new DLL".

Are some projects so large that more powerful machines are needed to build it in a reasonable amount of time?

What's "reasonable"? If I run a batch build on my local machine, there are many things I can't do. Rather than pay developers for builds to complete, pay IT to buy a real build machine already.

Is it I have just not worked on projects large enough?

Size is certainly one factor, but not the only one.


A build server is a distinct concept to a Continuous Integration server. The CI server exists to build your projects when changes are made. By contrast a Build server exists to build the project (typically a release, against a tagged revision) on a clean environment. It ensures that no developer hacks, tweaks, unapproved config/artifact versions or uncommitted code makes it into the released code.


The build server is used to build everyone's code when it is checked in. Your code may compile locally, but you most likely won't have all the change made by everyone else all the time.