upvote
That could actually be a git commit log with date, votes and other metadata.

But getting the entire country's law into git is already an impressive feat.

reply
If we are spitballing, I think there should be an actual file associated with the text so you can see the vote. A file makes it trivial to grep for "Senator X".

Not git, but Congress actually does have quite a bit of data digitized. A random example[0] -they even provide XML. The Congress data is going to give you all bills - many of which do not pass, so a different mission than this project.

[0] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/4818

reply
> Git isn't structured for collaborative commits.

Git isn't structured for collaborative commits, but community-wide conventions kind of "patches" support for it on top of the git message body, via "Co-Authored-By: name <name@example.com>" which IIRC most platforms support, and the convention itself initially comes from Linux kernel development.

reply
You could have the parliament (meaning including the election cycle) as the main author and then the parties and votes as Co-Authors.
reply
Is this really a problem we have now, though? This information is publicly available. If everyone here is so excited about LLMs then why would this even be needed? Anthropic can just give us the answer to every question. We don't need nerds that know what git is. :)
reply
Yeah you can, just smash commits on the PR where multiple contributed. It will say it was a collaborative commit in history showing all their avatars.
reply