Subversion considers its future

 Fedora has just over 10k projects total, last I looked Debian was a little shy of 2x Fedora
... so implying that all those "100K+ projects" are created equal is "interesting".
 Almost everything I've looked at or worked on in the past two years has been git or hg, the
two notable exceptions being glibc (which as I said in my previous comment has a de-facto std.
public git repo.) and the NSAs hosted SELinux tree (shocker, govt. being behind the times).
 And if you look at the work on packaging in the Linux distributions all of the new-ish work
just assumes git/hg, for instance Gitsrc in debian.

 But yes, before you have a seizure, I guess there probably are some older projects that
haven't moved to git/hg/bzr yet (and maybe even don't have a public de-facto std. git repo)
... for one reason or another. How many of the developers consider that a "good" thing though,
and not just a legacy that noone has fixed yet?

 Maybe it would have made you happier if I'd said "Creating your source in" instead of "Having
your source in" ... but, meh, I stand by the main point which is that SVN _lost_ any mindshare
lead it had about 2 years ago. And any SVN developers who say that'll "eventually" happen are
just deluding themselves.