Peter asks a few questions regarding the unit tests in Enterprise Library:
- Are the unit tests in Enterprise Library 1.0 valuable to you?
Yes, when I was reviewing the code I looked at it along side the unit tests so I could get a feel for how the code was intended to be used. I also did a overview of the unit tests in general to see how the EntLib team approached testing. I was particularly interested to find some of the tests *gasp* hitting the database. So many people advocate never hitting the database with unit tests which is something I haven't bought into. There are certain things that should hit the database when unit testing. The unit tests in EntLib that hit the database are a perfect example of when it does make sense.
- What was good? What was bad?
Good was the ability to see how the components could be used from the unit tests, good was the ability to see another teams approach to testing, good was seeing how you did unit testing against the database, good was having a set of unit tests to re-run after making changes (if I actually had).
Bad was....um....well....can their be anything bad with having unit tests? If I had spent more time with EntLib I'm sure I'd have something for this but I haven't so I don't 
- Did you run them when you got the code?
Yes
- Have you referred to them while exploring the EntLib code?
Yes
- If you’ve made changes to the EntLib code, did you update the unit tests? If not, why not?
Didn't make any changes, but if I had I would have updated the unit tests.