In the past, there have been some fairly fierce debates about the kind of licenses we should be using with Squeak code. In particular, the point was made by me and others that LGPL was appropriate, if at all, only for libraries associated with a plugin. Many felt that LGPL would not have the GPL-like viral impact in the context of an object-oriented monolithic system. While many of these points seemed valid, my instincts led me to take a substantially more conservative approach, suggesting that --at most-- we should permit Squeak-L/LGPL dual licenses for such code.
I am once again concerned about the use of LGPL for squeak code, in view of the positions recently taken by FSF with respect to LGPL and Java-based libraries, which has taken the view that clients of "included" Java libraries are virally attached by LGPL. As understood from skimming blogs discussing the issues, Apache foundation has opted to eschew LGPL libraries, in part, because of this FSF gloss.
There is a thread on Slashdot discussing this at present: http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/17/ 2257224&mode=thread&tid=108&tid=117&tid=126&tid=156&tid=99