How to choose the right build strategy for your application

How to choose the right build strategy for your application

One of the most practical decisions you make when deploying an app is your build strategy. On Sevalla, you have three primary options:

• Nixpacks
• Buildpacks
• Dockerfile

If you pick the right one early, deployments stay predictable, onboarding is easier, and production surprises drop fast.

If you pick the wrong one, you can still recover, but you will likely spend time fighting build behavior instead of shipping product.

Let us break this down clearly.

Quick decision guide

Use this if you want a fast default:

• Pick Nixpacks when you want fast setup and your stack is supported.
• Pick Buildpacks when you prefer Heroku-style build behavior and buildpack workflows.
• Pick Dockerfile when you need full control over runtime, system packages, and custom build steps.

Option 1: Nixpacks (best default for most teams)

Nixpacks is Sevalla’s default build strategy, and for good reason. It detects your project, installs dependencies, and creates a deployable container image with minimal setup.

Use Nixpacks when:

• You want to ship quickly with low config overhead.
• Your project uses a supported runtime.
• You do not need tight control over every image layer.

Why teams like it:

• Fast initial setup.
• Good defaults.
• Works well for straightforward application workloads.

Watch-outs:

• You are still relying on detection rules.
• Edge cases can require additional config (for example, custom build steps).

Option 2: Buildpacks (structured and familiar)

Buildpacks are a strong fit when your team already understands buildpack-based workflows or needs a more explicit buildpack chain than Nixpacks detection.

Use Buildpacks when:

• You want buildpack-driven behavior with language-specific builders.
• You need to control or order buildpacks.
• You have a stack that cleanly maps to supported buildpack languages.

Why teams pick it:

• Familiar approach for teams coming from Heroku-style platforms.
• More explicit than pure auto-detection.

Watch-outs:

• Language support is narrower than Dockerfile freedom.
• Buildpack order matters, and the primary language buildpack needs to be last.

Option 3: Dockerfile (maximum control)

Dockerfile-based builds give you full ownership of your runtime and build pipeline. If you need custom system dependencies, specific binaries, non-standard startup patterns, or exact image composition, this is usually the right choice.

Use Dockerfile when:

• You need complete control over the container image.
• You run uncommon stacks or mixed-runtime workloads.
• You have strict compliance, reproducibility, or performance requirements.

Why teams choose it:

• Full control over every layer.
• Works with almost any language/runtime.
• Easier to reason about complex production environments.

Watch-outs:

• You own more operational complexity.
• Bad Dockerfiles create slow builds and large images.

Control vs speed: the real trade-off

Most teams are not choosing between “good” and “bad.” They are choosing the right balance:

• Nixpacks: fastest path, least setup.
• Buildpacks: more structure and compatibility with buildpack workflows.
• Dockerfile: most control, most responsibility.

A useful rule:

• Start with Nixpacks.
• Move to Buildpacks when you need buildpack-specific behavior.
• Move to Dockerfile when you need deep customization or strict reproducibility.

Practical examples

Here is a simple mapping:

• Laravel app with typical PHP + queue + worker setup and no unusual system deps: start with Nixpacks.
• App migrated from Heroku with existing buildpack assumptions: use Buildpacks.
• Polyglot app, custom binaries, or strict CI/CD image requirements: use Dockerfile.

Common migration path

Many teams evolve in this order:

1. Start with Nixpacks to validate product and deployment flow quickly.
2. Move to Buildpacks if your stack aligns and you need clearer buildpack control.
3. Move to Dockerfile when platform-specific or runtime-specific demands grow.

That progression is normal. Build strategy is not a one-time decision; it should evolve with your application and team maturity.

Final checklist before you choose

Before locking this in, answer:

• Do we prioritize speed to deploy, or runtime control?
• Are we using only standard language/runtime dependencies?
• Do we need custom OS packages or build tools?
• Are we optimizing for developer onboarding simplicity?
• Do we need deterministic builds for regulated or high-control environments?

If your answers lean toward simplicity and speed, start with Nixpacks. If they lean toward control and custom behavior, use Dockerfile. If you need a structured middle path, Buildpacks is a solid option.

Closing thought

You do not need to over-engineer this on day one. Pick the simplest strategy that meets today’s constraints, then re-evaluate as your architecture evolves.

That is the real optimization.

This article was originally published on Sevalla Blog. Follow me on Twitter for more deployment and engineering insights.