Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer	hongyun shang
Do you understand and agree to our policy of having open and named reviews, and having your review included with the published manuscript. (If no, please inform the editor that you cannot review this manuscript.)	Yes
Is the language of sufficient quality?	Yes
Please add additional comments on language quality to clarify if needed
Is there a clear statement of need explaining what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is the source code available, and has an appropriate Open Source Initiative license <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses" target="_blank">(https://opensource.org/licenses)</a> been assigned to the code?	Yes
Additional Comments
As Open Source Software are there guidelines on how to contribute, report issues or seek support on the code?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is the code executable?	Unable to test
Additional Comments
Is installation/deployment sufficiently outlined in the paper and documentation, and does it proceed as outlined?	Unable to test
Additional Comments
Is the documentation provided clear and user friendly?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is there enough clear information in the documentation to install, run and test this tool, including information on where to seek help if required?
Additional Comments
Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies, and is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level?	Yes
Additional Comments
Have any claims of performance been sufficiently tested and compared to other commonly-used packages?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is test data available, either included with the submission or openly available via cited third party sources (e.g. accession numbers, data DOIs)?
Additional Comments
Are there (ideally real world) examples demonstrating use of the software?	Yes
Additional Comments
Is automated testing used or are there manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Additional Comments
Any Additional Overall Comments to the Author	This is a comprehensive database with many features that improves the shortcomings of cannabis species that had no genome database in the past. It is a good work. Here are some minor suggestions: 1. Did not find the function of searching gene and protein sequences directly by gene id without providing chromosome location, which may be a common feature of many omics databases. 2. In the chapter "The need for cannabis multi-omics databases and analysis platforms", "There are no analysis tools or results available on this website", "No results available" seems inappropriate. 3. In the chapter "Cannabis - Omics, Genetic and Phenotypic Datasets in the Public Domain", "Crop Ontology" Crop Ontology, is "Crop Ontology" repeated?
Recommendation	Minor Revisions