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