German laws might work different, but I'm not really under the impression that software version control is really that compatible with law making.
In source code we replace or modify the parts that doesn't work in place. Many laws does not work like that, they are a labyrinth of add ons. A new law is introduced with wordings like "This replaces the words "small businesses" with "nuclear rockets" in the law on "Workplace safety of fishing vessels of 1992", §12, section 3, line 5.
No amount of version control will ever find these changes.
These wordings are basically a manual description of a diff. They wouldn't be necessary if version control would be used for laws.
I actually think version control is an absolute necessity for laws.
I can imagine these "relative text patches" could just commit as is written but could be committed with a corresponding metadata and referential locations array backed by some kind of encoding that lands in the same commit. That would unlock a visualization tool that could render a strikeout for the earlier precedent legal text or something like that in whatever way the modification applies.
> They wouldn't be necessary if version control would be used for laws.
So a country only needs to rewrite all the laws to adopt versioning, cool.
In reality both have can be used, commits to see what changed by whom and wordings that says what changed
> So a country only needs to rewrite all the laws to adopt versioning, cool.
No, they only need to start using versioning in order to adopt versioning. Think of an "initial git commit"
Might work in some systems but England has Case Law stacked on top of statutes. That's tricky to turn back into code.
Case law is basically monkey-patching (or wrapping / decorating). It’s part of the running law but does not modify the law itself in—source.
I had thought the goal here was something more than just 'track changes', which legislators could do in Word
That's exactly like the German law works. And as far as I know, it's how all law system that aren't common/case law work.
Changes will either add, delete or change an existing law.
There is actually a website where someone has all changes dating back to 2006 and you can display diffs (called Synopsis in Germany) - for example: https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/5041/v322454-2025-03-25.htm
Most laws in most civil law countries (there are exceptions, but it's the standard for the main laws) are a fixed law on a topic which then gets updated. So the 2025 version of the Family Code in France is everything included, and if you do a diff with the 2024 version, you'll see which parts were removed/updated/replaced by which new parts (it could be a clarifying word, new contents, changed rules, etc.). Reading it end to end (it's a hefty book, but still) gives you a complete representation of all laws regarding families (marriage, divorce, kids, etc etc).
It's mostly the obsolete system of common law where to have an understanding of what is legal and what isn't, you need to have a spiderweb of random acts (random as in, they don't have to be thematic, so the Chicken Tax Act of 2005 can have provisions on solar panels that replace the previous solar panel legislation form the STOP KILLING OUR COMMUNITIES Act of 1785) that build/replace on one another, sometimes going very far back, with associated precedents that clarify them.
Most but not all laws in France are like that. In fact, some of the laws applied in France are written... in German and aren't compiled in the codes. There is a whole institute (albeit small) dedicated to studying and make those laws[1].
The case happened to me when I searched for the original text that said a worker have to be compensated in full for "short" sick leave, and what I found was a very short text in German. Hopefully the company I worked for complied with law after consulting its accountant.
This is a very special exception for the unique situation of Alsace and parts of Lorraine (Moselle) that spent a few decades in Germany, and as a result have a mixed legal system, and some other fun ones like extra public holidays.
I think your understanding is that the Act must be the content. But the Act isn't the content, the Criminal Code, Civil Code etc are the content. The Act itself is more like a patch file, with some surrounding metadata (and its own meta version history as proposed legislation gets marked up throughout the process). It could add a new file, but it could also be an edit. But in neither case is it the effective content, it's a description of changes to said content. (The line does get blurred on the initial commit though, because typically the name of the resulting law is the name of the Act that established it).
So you've called out precisely why version control systems present such a useful analog.
I one time learn that the cluster f of exceptions surprisingly quickly turns into something you [almost] cant replicate in software.
Of course one could also argue that it isn't a problem with poorly designed laws but that our programming languages are ill equipped for it.
Then again, the funniest thing I've seen in law: Where an engineer would make a nice drawing with the size of things neatly organized into available space, a law maker will spray all the numbers and description randomly all over the place as if to prevent anyone from ever building the described.
>German laws might work different, but I'm not really under the impression that software version control is really that compatible with law making.
Hard disagree. It allows you to attach a name to particular portions of the code (and a date), it shows you when the code moves from one status to another (branches), and you could even easily do things like show who voted/signed for any given piece.
What's not really compatible with law making as it is now, where to repeal a law it doesn't remove the offending code, but adds more code that says "now you can ignore that previous one". Those don't even make it into the official text until codification occurs (this is periodic, not continuous).
>In source code we replace or modify the parts that doesn't work in place. Many laws does not work like that, they are a labyrinth of add ons. A new law is introduced with wordings like "This replaces the words "small businesses" with "nuclear rockets" in the law on "Workplace safety of fishing vessels of 1992", §12, section 3, line 5.
Exactly. They've been doing it wrong (artifact of doing everything on paper, I think).