Reproduce:
1. Install Accounting
2. Accounting > Bank: Click on some unreconciled statement line There are some buttons like "Internal Transfer" representing reconciliation models.
3. Delete all reconciliation models.
4. Accounting > Bank: Click on some unreconciled statement line There is a button w/o label. Clicking on it gives an error. (In debug mode the button generation gives an error already) There should be no buttons at all

The issue is that the `get_available_reconcile_model_per_statement_line` can return sth like this in case no reconcilation model was found for statement lines with id 18, 19, 20, 21.
```python
{
    18: [{'id': None, 'display_name': None}],
    19: [{'id': None, 'display_name': None}],
    20: [{'id': None, 'display_name': None}],
    21: [{'id': None, 'display_name': None}]
}
```

Since the javascript code assumes that `{'id': None, 'display_name': None}` actually represents a reconciliation model, the error occurs.

After this commit `{'id': None, 'display_name': None}` entries should not appear anymore. In the example an empty dictionary would be returned

task: None

Since PR #203952, module operations are rejected if any module is in a `to install`, `to upgrade`, or `to remove` state. This has unintentionally exposed a subtle issue where certain imported modules can be left in an inconsistent `to upgrade` state, preventing further module management actions.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install a imported module, e.g., automobile.
2. Upgrade one of its dependency modules, e.g., purchase_product_matrix.
3. After the upgrade, the imported module is erroneously marked as `to upgrade`
4. The system log for ir.cron then repeatedly shows warnings like: “Skipping database <dbname> because of modules to install/upgrade/remove.”
5. From the Odoo App interface, the user cannot directly install/upgrade/uninstall modules
6. This situation persists until:
    (a) The user manually clicks “Cancel Upgrade” for every `to upgrade` imported module, or
    (b) The system auto-resets these states after `MAX_FAIL_TIME` (5 hours), reverting them to `installed`.

This fix reverts such modules to `installed` during `button_upgrade`

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#215132

Versions
--------
- saas-18.2+

Steps
-----
1. Have a product with optional products and/or variants;
2. add the product to your wishlist;
3. go to wishlist;
4. click on the cart button;
5. close the configurator using the × in the top right corner.

Issue
-----
The product gets removed from the wishlist, even though it wasn't added to the cart.

Cause
-----
Before b8d0ab4275b24, the product configurator would never get shown from the wishlist, but with the centralizing of the "Add to Cart" logic, it does pop up. The issue is that it shows up after the product has already been removed from the wishlist.

Solution
--------
Await the result of `addToCart`, which returns the quantity add to the cart, and only call `_removeWish` if it is greater than zero.

Also ensure that the product configurator opens with the correct product attributes, and that closing it doesn't automatically redirect you to checkout, unless selected in the configurator.

opw-4783677

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#214369

Before this commit, there was not default value for some variables that are being calculated on _get_custom_value_from_order if the field customizable_pdf_form_fields was not updated by the frontend.

## Issue:
When creating a quotation with headers or footers set to *"Add by
default"* (e.g. via Quotation Templates), and printing the PDF without
entering the Quotation Builder tab, the system raises the following
error:

```python
TypeError: the JSON object must be str, bytes or bytearray, not bool
```

This occurs because `customizable_pdf_form_fields` remains `False`
(the default value), and `json.loads(False)` is invalid.

Impacted Versions: saas-18.2 and later

## Steps to Reproduce (on runbot):
1. Go to Sales > Configuration > Headers / Footers
2. Select *Project Description*
3. Activate *Add by default*
4. Create a new quotation
5. Select *Office Furniture* as the Quotation Template
6. Directly print *PDF Quote* without opening the *Quotation Builder* tab

## Current Behavior:
Raises Error
```python
TypeError: the JSON object must be str, bytes or bytearray, not bool
```
## Expected Behavior:
The PDF prints correctly with the default header/footer.

Video: Available on task

OPW-4840953

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#213267

### Steps to reproduce:
- On a contact, add the "Factur-X" E-Invoicing method under the "Accounting" tab
- Create an invoice with this contact as the customer
- Send the invoice, download the PDF
- Verify the PDF. For example with https://demo.verapdf.org/
- `The aforementioned EOL marker shall be immediately followed by a % (25h) character followed by at least four bytes, each of whose encoded byte values shall have a decimal value greater than 127`
- `The MIME type of an embedded file, or a subset of a file, shall be specified using the Subtype key of the file specification dictionary. If the MIME type is not known, the "application/octet-stream" shall be used`

### Cause:
- 1
Pypdf 2.2 is [adding the necessary binary](https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/commit/036789a4664e3f572292bc7dceec10f08b7dbf62) like Odoo [does](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c1679123c9c6f7184293befb399de1e79a6205a9/odoo/tools/pdf/__init__.py#L471) for Pypdf2.1 because it is mandatory for PDF/A.

The issue comes from two line break following each others:
Pypdf2.2 adds one at the beginning of the [file](https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/blob/036789a4664e3f572292bc7dceec10f08b7dbf62/PyPDF2/pdf.py#L487): 
`\n % E2 E3 CF D3`
Then Odoo [adds the header `%PDF-1.7\n` before](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c1679123c9c6f7184293befb399de1e79a6205a9/odoo/tools/pdf/__init__.py#L469) resulting in :
`b"%PDF-1.7" \n \n % E2 E3 CF D3`
PDF/A expects to have `% E2 E3 CF D3` on the second line right after the header but there is nothing on this line.

- 2
The Subtype is badly formatted: from `text/xml` to `/text#232Fxml` instead of `/text#2Fxml`

This occurs as Odoo [replace `/` by `#2F`](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2e43bee546d5c14729d654386209b539d8aa71d7/odoo/tools/pdf/__init__.py#L369-L377).
But then when [adding the subtype](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2e43bee546d5c14729d654386209b539d8aa71d7/odoo/tools/pdf/__init__.py#L595C17-L595C74) to the attachment, we call `NameObject` from PyPdf. This object will [format](https://github.com/py-pdf/pypdf/blob/1c4173a12cd21b91dff6d6596ed0bbf1999f2d10/PyPDF2/generic/_base.py#L548) the text again replacing the `#` by `#23`. 

### Solution:
- Don't add a `\n` after `%PDF-1.7` when using `_pypdf2_2`.

- As PyPdf2.2 is doing the formatting itself, we don't format on our side if `submod == ._pypdf2_2`. 
We still need to add the `/`.

opw-4748600

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#211006

Previously, when multiple form snippets were added to the same page,
corresponding fields (e.g., the "Name" field) in each form were assigned
the same ID.

This happened because we retrieved the form fields from the
`FormEditorRegistry`.
For the first form snippet, field IDs are generated and assigned
correctly. However, assigning IDs to the fields also updated the fields
stored in the `FormEditorRegistry`.
So when a second form snippet is added, the fields it receives from the
registry already have an ID.
The ID generation logic skips fields that already have an ID, so the
fields in subsequent forms never got new IDs.

With this fix, we now create a shallow copy of each field before using
it. This prevents the original field definitions in the
`FormEditorRegistry` from being modified.

As a result, fields in different forms now receive unique IDs without
needing to explicitly delete the field ID to force a new one to be
generated.

[task-4251881](https://www.odoo.com/web#id=4251881&cids=1&menu_id=4720&action=333&active_id=1695&model=project.task&view_type=form)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#214954
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#183883

…nbuild

**Problem:**
When decreaseing the quantity of the stock move created for the component of the bom when unbuilding, it triggers an error message

**Steps to reproduce:**
- create a product tracked by quantity (the "component product")
- in the category field select an avco category
- set an on hand quantity of 1
- create another product tracked by quantity (the "final product")
- create a bom for this product and select your first product as the component
- create a manufacture order for the final product
- confirm and produce all
- unbuild it and click on the "Unbuilds" smart button
- select the line of the manufacture order
- click on "product moves"
- select the line of the component product
- set the quantity to 0

**Current behavior:**
an error message appears

**Expected behavior:**
a stock valuation layer should be created with
the unit cost of the component product at the
time of the manufacture order

**Cause of the issue:**
price_unit_map is created to make sure that when unbuilding a non standard final product,
the outgoing stock valuation layer created for the final product has the same value as in the MO (the current standard_price could have changed due to POs since the MO happened for instance) https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/05cff3b7d866f6bc95c4b32f343ae14a4da946f2/addons/mrp_account/models/stock_move.py#L47-L56

when reducing the quantity of the stock move linked to the component of the unbuild an outgoing stock valuation layer is created and _get_out_svl_vals is triggered,
those 2 conditions are true
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/05cff3b7d866f6bc95c4b32f343ae14a4da946f2/addons/mrp_account/models/stock_move.py#L55-L56 but the product is not the same as the one of move_finished_ids of the MO (this product is final product of the MO) so the filter result in an empty record set and
[0] creates an index out of range error
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/05cff3b7d866f6bc95c4b32f343ae14a4da946f2/addons/mrp_account/models/stock_move.py#L49-L51

**Fix:**
the unit_cost of the stock valuation layer for the component product created from unbuild is the same as :
the unit_cost from the stock valuation layer created from the MO for the component (even if the standard_price changed inbetween).
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4fd9ae6ccd96ac13475e7e5aa9805e6f529cd609/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L516-L517
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4fd9ae6ccd96ac13475e7e5aa9805e6f529cd609/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L51

So to be consistent an ajustement to the the stock move created from the unbuild should create a stock valuation layer which also has the same unit cost

opw-4747920

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#211091

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install account_budget
- Activate "Budget Management" in Accounting settings

- Go to "Accounting / Accounting / Analytic Budget"
- Create a new budget:
  * Budget Type: Expense
  * Period: [this month]
  * Budget Lines: [a line with an analytic account (AA) in 2 plans]
- Open the budget

**Issue 1:**
Create a PO at the current date with a line having only one of the AA as analytic distribution and an amount higher than the budgeted amount.
The PO line and the Budget button appear in red, but it shouldn't because the analytic distribution of the line doesn't match all the accounts defined on the budget line.
The line will not impact the budget, but it appears in red, which is confusing.

**Cause 1:**
When computing the budget lines linked to the PO line, the domain that is used is only taking into account the plans that are set on the PO line, ignoring the plans that are not set.
For the Budget button, all the PO lines are used instead of just those having the correct analytic distribution.

**Issue 2:**
- Create a PO at the current date with 2 lines:
1) a line with the same AA than the budget line and an amount higher than the budget amount
2) a line with the same AA than the budget line and an amount lower than the budget amount
- Save the PO
The first line should be red, but it is not.

**Cause 2:**
When computing the budget lines linked to the PO lines, only the last PO line has its value set.

opw-4757067

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#87884

…rrect data from MO operation

**Problem:**
lines of mrp.workcenter.productivity added from 
the workorder widget do not update the linked 
analytic account with the right amount

**Steps to reproduce:**
- enable "analytic accounting" setting
- Unarchive MTO route
- Create a new product
- In the inventory page check MTO and Manufacture routes
- click on the Bill of materials smart button and create 
a new BOM
- add a component and an operation
- Create another product, set "product type" as service
- in the "create on order" field select "project & task"
- create a new quotation with these two products and confirm
- click on the "manufacturing" smart button
- in the work orders page click on the "open work order" 
button at the right of the line
- click on add a line
- set a duration of 30:10 and clik elsewhere on the screen
- save
- click on the "analytic account" smart button
- select the only line and click on the "gross margin" 
smart button

**Current behavior:**
There is a single line with an amount of 0.01

**Expected behavior:**
The price should reflect the hourly rate of the employee
for the task (that's 50.28 with a 100$/hours rate for 
instance)

**Cause of the issue:**
There is two issue here.
First Issue : 
When clicking on save on the widget, this will 
modify the time_ids field of the mrp.workorder
this will create a new mrp.workcenter.productivity
with the values we wrote.
Consequently, on the vals_list when the create method
is triggered duration is set to the duration we wrote 
(so here 30.17)

Because of this, when the _compute_duration is the triggered
previous_durations will be [30.17] and _create_analytic_entry
will be called with a parameter of 30.17
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8a21b4f8ee8d24ebbc9ac2eb08696a0de056357f/project_mrp_workorder_account/models/mrp_workcenter_productivity.py#L10-L14

Therefore, inside _create_analytic_entry 
duration will be 0 and amount will also be 0

This issue does not happen if the duration is set by changing
the "real duration" in the "work orders" page of the manufacturing 
order. 
This is because when doing it this way, we modify the duration 
of the mrp.workorder which triggers the set_duration_method
which also creates a new mrp.workcenter.productivity but 
here the _prepare_timeline_vals returns a dictonary without 
a duration field
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4fe90167266a92c3a5941eac9a6a2084a80056ac/addons/mrp/models/mrp_workorder.py#L352-L353

Second Issue: 
The line we see with a 0.01 amount is actually created 
before we save. 
It's created from the onchange method when we change the 
duration on the form.
The onchange of duration triggers an onchange of start date
which gets the value of duration and triggers of recomputation
of duration 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4fe90167266a92c3a5941eac9a6a2084a80056ac/addons/mrp/models/mrp_workcenter.py#L522-L531
As a consequence, _compute_duration is called. 
self.duration is initially not rounded so in our exemple 
previous duration will be equal to 30.1666666666668
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8a21b4f8ee8d24ebbc9ac2eb08696a0de056357f/project_mrp_workorder_account/models/mrp_workcenter_productivity.py#L10-L11
However after the call to super()._compute_duration(), self.duration
will be rounded thanks to the use of convert to duration inside 
the super method
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4fe90167266a92c3a5941eac9a6a2084a80056ac/addons/mrp/models/mrp_workcenter.py#L472

So when doing the difference here inside _create_analytic_entry
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8a21b4f8ee8d24ebbc9ac2eb08696a0de056357f/project_mrp_workorder_account/models/mrp_workcenter_productivity.py#L38
duration will be 5.555555555556424e-05 and amount will be 
-0.005555555555556424 which results in the creation of this line 
with an amount of 0.01

**fix:**
Calling the creation of account.analytic.line from the compute method leads to other problems : 
For instance, if a line is added in the "open work order" widget and we change the end date but change our mind and don't save the line, the duration will have been computed and a new account analytic line will have been created

Whereas calling the method _create_analytic_entries from create() and write() ensures it's only called when the model is saved
opw-4715690

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#85517