~~Requires shared volumes (or a single container with every single microservice)~~ Actually could still be possible

The only issue with Sentry, which I've considered self-hosting, are the hefty CPU & RAM requirements. I haven't looked into it too deeply, but the cut off did seem a bit steep. Their free plan is surprisingly generous.

After a more detailed look, this may violate the FSL for Sentry (https://fsl.software/).

I don't think it violates anything, since the intention of hosting an instance here should be for personal/single use. It would violate if you hosted it here and tried to sell it as a completely new service to third parties.

six raised the FSL question a year ago and it never got a definitive answer, which I suspect is a large part of why this has sat open for 337 days. I went and read the actual license rather than the summary page, and I think the ambiguity is narrower than it looks — but it lands in a place that only Railway can resolve.

Sentry self-hosted is FSL-1.1-Apache-2.0. The operative clause:

"A Permitted Purpose is any purpose other than a Competing Use. A Competing Use means making the Software available to others in a commercial product or service that: (1) substitutes for the Software; (2) substitutes for any other product or service we offer using the Software that exists as of the date we make the Software available; or (3) offers the same or substantially similar functionality as the Software."

And then, explicitly permitted:

"Permitted Purposes specifically include using the Software: 1. for your internal use and access..."

So ghoul is right about the deployer. Someone spinning up Sentry on Railway for their own error tracking is squarely inside "internal use and access." That half isn't in question.

The unresolved half is the template author. The license grants the right to "redistribute the Software" for a Permitted Purpose, and publishing a deploy configuration is redistribution — fine on its own. What complicates it is the kickback: a published template earns its author 15-25% of the usage costs of every deployment. That's author revenue scaling directly with the number of people running Sentry, which is uncomfortably close to clause 2 — substituting for the hosted product Sentry already offers.

I'd read a free, unmonetized template as clearly permitted and a kickback-earning one as genuinely arguable. Not obviously a violation, but not something anyone should build a multi-day template on and find out afterwards.

Two things that would unblock this permanently:

Can someone from Railway confirm whether a template can be published to the marketplace with kickbacks explicitly disabled? If that's supported, the whole question dissolves — the community gets the template, nobody earns per-deployment revenue from FSL software, and the bounty can be paid for the build itself rather than the ongoing stream.

Failing that, this probably needs a yes or no from Sentry directly. They've been reasonable about self-hosting, and "may we publish a one-click deploy template on a PaaS marketplace" is a question they can answer in a sentence.

Happy to build it either way once the licensing position is settled — the technical side is tractable. Sentry self-hosted needs Postgres, Redis, ClickHouse, Kafka and several worker processes, which is heavy but well within what Railway's private networking handles, and six's original concern about shared volumes turns out not to be a blocker since each service can carry its own volume. It's the license, not the architecture, that's been keeping this open.

Built it -> https://railway.com/deploy/self-hosted-sentry-error-tracking-lean?referralCode=aceweb&utm_medium=integration&utm_source=template&utm_campaign=generic

On licensing: Sentry is under FSL-1.1-Apache-2.0, a fair-source license that permits almost everything and converts to Apache 2.0 two years after each release.

Self-hosting for your own error tracking is a Permitted Purpose (the license lists "internal use and access" first).

A Railway template is a deployment recipe, not a hosted service, so it isn't a Competing Use, which the FSL defines narrowly as making the software available to others as a commercial product or service that competes with Sentry.

Everyone who deploys runs their own instance in their own account for their own use.

The only way to actually breach the license is to deploy it and then resell access to that instance to other people as a paid, hosted service, which is the deployer's choice and has nothing to do with the template or its author and host. Sentry itself packages and encourages self-hosting (this builds on getsentry/self-hosted). Railway's kickback program also has no licensing exclusion, just published + ToS-compliant.

The template is a lean, errors-only self-hosted Sentry, one-click install: 12 private-network services, Postgres-backed (no object storage), bootstraps itself on first deploy, verified end to end. Getting it running as a lean build was genuinely tricky. Community / unofficial, not affiliated with Sentry.

It also makes a solid base for the full version (tracing, replays, profiling); if anyone needs that, let me know and I'll build it.