Add Nordicq.org

[Vanheden]

Add Nordicq.org please. It's a UNiT3D tracker.

[swannie-eire]

@Vanheden I am sure if you ask staff on Nordicq.org they would create the module. Since the site is united it should not take anyone with basic level of understanding of coding to make a module from the United template.

[tiberio87]

I opened this PR #1162 because I created a base module for nordicq.org after discussing it with a staff member there. During that conversation I was told that, for the bot to be acceptable on their tracker, some changes would be required to make uploads compliant with their rules.
NordicQ does not want repacked or reconstructed torrents. Releases must be uploaded as-is, preserving the original folder structure and all included files (such as .nfo, .srt, samples, extras, etc.). They are not aiming to be a mirror-style tracker where only the main video file is uploaded.
My intention with this PR was only to add basic tracker support, not to enforce current Upload Assistant behavior as “correct” for them. If the tool currently strips non-video files or rebuilds torrents in a way that alters the original release structure, then I understand why that would be a blocker for NordicQ usage.
I’m fine with adapting the module or contributing changes so that, for trackers like this, the bot can upload releases untouched instead of filtering files. I just wanted to start with the base integration and then work toward compliance with their specific rules.

[Audionut]

Supporting a whole host of unnecessary files, would require a level of complexity that I'm not entirely sure I wish to support.

It would fundamentally require torrent rehashing for every upload to the tracker, and there is no database with which to ensure, that whatever folder selected by the user, with whatever files in it, is a valid original file structure.

I have my own personal bias against additional files also, since they effectively destroy cross-seeding, and the inherit retention benefits that result from cross-seeding.

[tiberio87]

Thanks for the detailed explanation — I appreciate you taking the time to clarify both the technical and philosophical side.
That makes sense regarding complexity, torrent structure validation, and the impact on cross-seeding. I understand why full “untouched folder” support would be a significant shift from the current design and goals of the tool.
In that case, my intention with this PR #1162 is much more limited. The NordicQ module can still be useful for standard uploads that follow the current Upload Assistant model (single main video file, typical non-scene style releases), which aligns with how the tool already works and with your design philosophy.
If there are no technical issues with the module itself, it could still be merged in its current form for those kinds of uploads, without introducing the additional folder/file complexity discussed above. Any stricter “full release structure” requirements for that tracker could then be handled outside the core tool or through custom workflows.
Thanks again for the feedback.

[Audionut]

Prohibiting scene uploads seems prudent. I can add an additional print in the workflow about the requirement for original file/folder layout checking.