[jsr294-modularity-eg] Changes to the superpackage model

[Alex Blewitt]

I like the idea of the module proposal made on http://altair.cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/jsr294-modularity-eg/2008-March/000171.html 
.

However, I think that the 'module' name at the access layer is a  
slightly different term than what's implied. If you mark a type with  
this definition, it's module-private (so that only others in the same  
module can see it). There's a concept of a 'module' (set of related  
things) and 'things which that module can see' and the same term is  
being used for both.

May I suggest that the access modifier is called ACC_MODULE_PRIVATE  
instead of ACC_MODULE? That would give a clearer indication of what  
the requirements are. The source code keyword 'module' is appropriate,  
since like packages, it's essentially declaring a membership of that  
element.

Alex