Granted, however there is probably just as much if not more closed project dying the vary same death inside companies, of course they are used only for internal stuff. In every workplace that I have been to there has always been the "this system we do not ever touch because no one knows what it does or how it works, but it does". And the source of most of these projects are also long gone, a situation that we at least don't have with the open projects.
It's a culture difference that probably is very hard for foreigners to understand but we Swedes tend to "celebrate" military losses and deaths of kings. Mostly celevrated is the deaths of Gustaf II Adolf (which is his Swedish name) and King Charles XII both in November (the 6th and the 30th). Our biggest military failure, which is the Wasa Ship which sank at it's christening, is something that we are wery proud of and display in a museum
We hade one "incident" on a prior workplace where we had a French CEO visiting on the 6th of November and when he noticed that every one where eating a special cake (as one does in the memory of Gustaf II Adolf) or own CEO then said "we celebrate that the Germans killed our king", the french guy looked like he was on candid camera or something
Version bumps only happen if you insist on putting several project into the same repository. And even then you can get per project version in "svn info" and "svn log" (and probably via other means as well).
As to your second statement, what? Please explain because that is nothing that I have ever seen after using SVN for decades.
When I say I hate CVS with a passion, I have to also say that if there any SVN users (Subversion users) in the audience, you might want to leave. Because my hatred of CVS has meant that I see Subversion as being the most pointless project ever started, because the whole slogan for the Subversion for a while was 'CVS done right' or something like that. And if you start with that kind of slogan, there is nowhere you can go. It's like, there is no way to do CVS right.
Which is what I have said consistently in each post. Then he talks about branching and merging which is a huge pain in CVS, a fact that no one argues. In fact it's one of the main reasons that SVN was created in the first place. So no that does not apply to SVN as well. And finally he talks about using SCM in a distributed model which is completely uninteresting for what we argue (since the project in TFS is not distributed and that no one here have argued that SVN would be a preferred choice in a distributed project).
So no I actually think that it's you who don't really understand what you saw and heard, you don't like SVN and that bias made you interpret his talk in a different way than what he actually said. Nothing strange about that, it's just the way the human mind works.
Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome. -- Dr. Johnson