platform is output with Sys.info(); linux and Mac systems are equal and windows may differ

good idea!
otherwise you could use a platform dependent expect_equal but I think your idea is sufficient

After investing several hour trying different encodings, e.g. using raw strings, I still don't find a way to make this work. I also don't see a way of changing the source message, because it's originating from another package.

We should definitely keep it in the README.

would mention it there at least though because bootstrapping may be time consuming

don't think its necessary. there is anyway ordering applied to it in later stages.
otherwise ranking step (rank.aggregated.list()) could always do the ordering directly (then the test would check whether ordering is working). As mentioned before I avoided such change before the release because of (very unlikely) risk of breaking something in the first level hierarchy

Is the order of the rows relevant in any processing step? If not, the tests can be removed. Currently, I don't see a way making it work for both systems I have available for testing (Win10, R 3.6.3 and Ubuntu 18.04, R 4.0.3).

I do see those as well on Mac

R 4.0.2.
testthat previously 2.3.2, now 3.0.1.
the issue is however not connected to test_that I see that in the first 2 tests in aggregate-then-rank the ordering in the data set is not used but sorted

The platform might not be the (only) reason.
@wiesenfa: Which version of R and testthat are you using?

Recap: The initially chosen license (GPLv3) is not compatible with GPLv2 only licenses of dependencies (e.g. ggplot2, relations)

seems to not fail on windows machines. but does on my Mac (and thus might also on linux). minor issue, defer to post 1.0.0

The idea of the web app is to lower the entry level for users that are not familiar with and/or don't want to install R (as this is already a hurdle for some of them).

It works for me on the latest develop branch (#921705).

would defer to after release

please close if ok

added to documentation of as.challenge():
(arg annotator:) If multiple annotators annotated the test cases, a string specifying the name of the column that contains the annotator identifiers. Only applies to rang-then-aggregate. Use with caution: Currently not tested.

added

podium(ranking)

to vignette.
podium() does have a different syntax for layouting (it is not ggplot2 but base graphics) but vignette does not describe layouting for ggplot2 plots either

report() does not know what type of consensus ranking method had been used.
I added sentence
"Consensus ranking according to mean ranks across tasks if method="euclidean" where in case of ties (equal ranks for multiple algorithms) the average rank is used, i.e. ties.method="average"."
to help for consensus() and would suggest to also add this to the vignette/readme, but not to report. Could someone of you please take care of this?

@eisenman do you want to do this with roxygen?

kept select.if(), winner(), extract.workfolow and compareRanks()
and removed everything not supported anymore.
as.warehouse (benchmarkUtils) is not exported, recommend to leave because this may come handy for specific situations

removed second()

What is the problem?
in the extend of the vignette it would be simply

legend now always at bottom and dynamically adjusts to number of algorithms and algorithm name length.
Took me almost the day...

max number of tasks / algorithms now 20 in stacked frequency and line plots, respectively for legend appear on right, otherwise put on bottom of plot. could also be put to lower number

only podium plots and line plots actually require algorithms in legend, otherwise algorithm is identifiable from x-axis or facet label. Now, these redundant legends are removed.
besides that stacked frequency plots have colored tasks and respective legend

works again for single task visualizations. in case multiple plots (a list of plots) is created %++% instead of + must be used for scale_*_() etc
mention in vignette

ok. just an idea, thought this might help issues with the server because people can run stuff by themselves and still seize the user interface.
can be closed or considered later

I don't see that 1. is an issue. Further improvements were done in the scope of T27996 and T27420.

Compensated for 2. Text was revised in T27677.

It sounds nice, but I also think that we can run into cumbersome situations w.r.t. package management and version control with this approach: If the web app is located within the package, for each change to the package itself, it has to be investigated how the change affects the web app. The developer also has to adapt and test the web app then. This also means that for each package release, a corresponding web app has to be provided. In my opinion it makes more sense to focus either on the package or the web app during the development. Probably, we want to improve the web app that is based on a fixed package version x most frequently. This use case is then hampered by this approach as the package itself also evolves.

The plot functions that are used in the report have Roxygen documentation now. There's also a vignette called "Visualizations" that shows and explains the plots along with the corresponding plot function.

Thank you for clarification!

It has to be
ordering= names(meanRanks)
i.e. a vector of algorithm names in the ranking order
see reportMultiple.Rmd: ordering_consensus=names(params$consensus)