The thing you will really need to push on in your message is ease-of-use and functionality. Continuous Integration is one of those things that you mention to most teams and they raise an eyebrow and go "Why would I do that? Our tests only take 30 seconds." For the teams that know how CI would help them, they're already running a Hudson instance, and will need a compelling reason to switch.
I think you'll definitely need to start talking about the sort of things you get with Hudson plugins: particularly reporting, static code analysis etc. above and beyond simply building and running tests.
I'm a big believer in CI. I work with Hudson every once in a while, and the devs on that project are very good indeed. It's definitely an enterprise hammer which doesn't necessarily make it too easy to crack small nuts (hudson.rb alleviates much as you don't need a Java web server, but you still need some private server somewhere), and more people running CI can only be a net benefit.
I think you'll definitely need to start talking about the sort of things you get with Hudson plugins: particularly reporting, static code analysis etc. above and beyond simply building and running tests.
I'm a big believer in CI. I work with Hudson every once in a while, and the devs on that project are very good indeed. It's definitely an enterprise hammer which doesn't necessarily make it too easy to crack small nuts (hudson.rb alleviates much as you don't need a Java web server, but you still need some private server somewhere), and more people running CI can only be a net benefit.