I like the way Continuum does all the work of setting up an internal repository for the local SCM view, so I don't have to define that externally like I do in CruiseControl. Ironically, however, I now see a capability in CruiseControl that I need, that I don't see in Continuum, mostly because of the "clean" interface it defines to the project and SCM.
I have a couple old projects that were not committing any new code to, which I needed to "enhance" to make an effective build. For instance, I wanted to amend the manifest.mf to include things like the build number that CruiseControl set. I did this by defining a build.xml outside of the project that takes parameters, like where the actual project build.xml is, and changing the deployable artifact file to include an "environment" name that it will be deployed to, and a couple other things. The build definition in Continuum allows me to specify a relative path to the build.xml, but that's probably not good enough.
