I think we'll differ here - but it's a nuance really. In .NET your BuildServer has everything to do with deployment by necessity - that's not the case in other frameworks.
It does work, it is convenient, but that's not a Build Server's function in concept.
Which things RE deployment did I leave out? I was considering the config as part of the coding...
Surely with any compiled language the "build" (or build server) has everything to do with deployment? You have to build it somewhere, either on a build server, on a server elsewhere (AppHarbor style), or on your local machine.
You could cut the build machine out by building locally and pushing the binaries out via git, but that's just really an implementation detail.
I would have agreed with Rob, but I have to admit you make a good point.
Rob is nonetheless correct that deployment in ASP.NET is poor. I think you explained one of the reasons why: static languages. It seems like you've convinced yourself that something is convenient because you feel that there's really no other solutions. I think you right and wrong...You are right because it isn't going to change, so deal with it...You are wrong because there are alternatives which have changed.
It does work, it is convenient, but that's not a Build Server's function in concept.
Which things RE deployment did I leave out? I was considering the config as part of the coding...