Everybody will have a different opinion, only you can make the decision for your photography. And you are a superb photographer that gets the best out of both the 100 and the 135.
Personally, I believe, after getting the 70-200 and the initial love fest, you will start to see slight limitations in it, it doesn't focus as close as the 100, we are not talking macro shooting, just tight closeups, and it isn't as smooth as the 135.
I would strongly advise keeping what you can until you have owned the 70-200 for a while, then make a decision based on your actual images.
The one negative that has been leveled at the 70-200 is the harsh bokeh, your images often display very smooth blurring as an integral aspect of the image.
Each photographers situation is different. Personally, I use both my 135L and 70-200 2.8 II frequently. I don't own a 100 L so can't comment there.
I use the 135L for a good percentage of my portraits. I've done side by side portrait comparisons with the two lenses and prefer the bokeh and sharpness with the prime. But, the 135mm portraits with the 70-200 are still excellent, I just like the 135L shots a little better.
I also use the 135L outdoors for my sons school sporting activities when I don't want to lug the heavy and conspicuous 70-200 around. It's fast enough that lack of image stabilization really isn't an issue.
I use the 70-200 for a variety of situations, from portraits in and out of the studio and indoor and outdoor sports. It's my longest lens currently, so I use it for wildlife shots when hiking even though its a heavy beast to carry around very long.
So, I would recommend keeping at least the 135 for several months after you get a 70-200, so you can use them side by side.
BTW, you will love the 70-200 2.8 II, its an awesome lens.