[Bioperl-l] Use of Root.pm versus RootI.pm

[Sendu Bala]

Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> So it looks like an abstract base class, not an interface that  
> defines a contract or API? Should use Root.pm then, would be my vote.

Agreed, that was actually what I did in my local copy when I made a new 
inheriting class (so discovering the problem). This change is harmless 
to other modules, but does mean they'll have redundant use of 
Bio::Root::Root which will want cleaning up at some stage.