Currently journal items shown don't belong to the account group that
they should belong to, and from saas-18.3 an error will be generated
after following the below steps or step mentioned in ref PR [1].

- Install `Accounting (accountant)` with demo data
- Create account groups e.g., name as `Test 1` and code prefix `1 to 1`
- Go to the general ledger report
- Click on `Journal Items` of the account group line `1 Test 1`

Error from saas-18.3:
`ValueError: Cannot convert account.account.group_id to SQL because it is ...`

This error occurs because PR with ref [1] in 17.0 added the` group_id` field of the
`account.account` model to the search domain. However, in 18.0, commit [2] modified
this field so that it is no longer stored. As a result, when a search domain includes
this `non-stored` field, Odoo skips the domain evaluation and logs a error at code
line [3]. Consequently, the changes introduced by commit [1] have no functional effect from 18.0.

Also, starting from saas-18.3, passing such a non-stored field in a domain raises an
explicit error at code line [4], instead of being silently ignored.

This commit resolves the issue by introducing an SQL query that
returns the account ids related to `record_id(account group id)`
include `record_id` as `None`.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/100191
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/854c3b27aa5476c208572f19e64f8f3364bfc381#diff-19ef5a530c506fdee93fe0d113e61946b87fae7dd2d360558da69c0014f766b2R114-R767
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71e86f38c7699aaea980c929c67835a3495edf55/odoo/osv/expression.py#L1166-L1174
[4]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/00517e9e085c6fa9e00bedb8aee122a60e407fea/odoo/orm/fields.py#L1201

sentry-7100657414

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103137

Steps to reproduce:
--------------------------------
1. Install `industry_fsm_sale` module
2. Go to Settings > Configure Document Layout
3. Select the Bubble document layout and save
4. Open any Field Service task
5. Use the Products smart button to add one or more products
6. Click the Settings icon > Print > Field Service Report

Observation:
--------------------------------
In Time & Material tables using the Bubble layout, table borders show a mix of rounded corners and sharp edges, resulting in inconsistent visuals

Issue:
--------------------------------
The table tags in the report were missing the `table-borderless` class. As a result, the layout-applied rounded borders conflicted with the default table borders

Solution:
--------------------------------
Add the `table-borderless` class to the affected table tags so the tables inherit consistent rounded borders from the document layout


Before:
<img width="787" height="317" alt="before_css" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/dac136a8-022a-4c36-8cdb-1c0fbb048f3e" />


After:
<img width="816" height="372" alt="after_css" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b5f96e75-2cd3-44cf-89e3-9a3b564c8369" />


opw-5401612

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#105616

*= account_bank_statement_import_csv

An exception is currently triggered when a user attempts to import a bank
transaction file containing more than 80 transaction lines (see ref file [1]).

Steps to produce an error:
- Install `Accounting (accountant)` module
- Go to `Accounting` > Click on `Bank` > Click `Upload`
- Upload  ref file [1] and click `Test/Import` >>> Error occurs

Error: `psycopg2.errors.SerializationFailure: could not serialize access
due to concurrent update`

Error from 19.0: `InvalidSavepointSpecification : savepoint "ef05b579-df3f
-11f0-bc75-74563c5c983f" does not exist`

The issue occurs because, in `model.py` code line [2] creates a `savepoint`.
Before this `savepoint` is closed, code line [3] is triggered during the
creation of the bank statement line [4] and attempts to commit the
cursor using `self.env.cr.commit()`. Because a commit is executed while
the savepoint is still active, the system fails when trying to close the
previously created savepoint.

This commit fixes the issue by avoiding cursor commits during the import
process. The `import_file=True` flag is added to the context when
`_cron_try_auto_reconcile_statement_lines` is called from `execute_import`,
allowing the method to safely skip commit/rollback logic when
`import_file` is present in the context.

[1]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19hKnR8pGB27xkbEHgYYXIkBaPXV8RZZE/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=111844484867458262929&rtpof=true&sd=true
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/11c469086cb4d08453a70cd7bd30d7391f635ae3/odoo/orm/models.py#L971-L973
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2683b77cd6688877c308d0733bccfc5ad84530c1/account_accountant/models/account_bank_statement.py#L218
[4]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2683b77cd6688877c308d0733bccfc5ad84530c1/account_accountant/models/account_bank_statement.py#L1780

sentry-6974536471
opw-5359810

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106780
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#102760

**Issue**
Users without 'Admin' Sign rights could in some cases not access the sample template.

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Go to 'Templates' and archive the existing one in order to have the 'Try our sample document' shown and click on it.
2. Add some sign items to the template, and send it for a signature request.
3. With an user having only 'User: Own Templates' Sign rights, go to 'Templates' and click 'Try our sample document'.

Access Error:
Blame the following rules:
- sign.item: group_sign_user: Create and manage template items

**Cause**
When the template has an associated sign request, it is copied.
The problem is that the user currently doesn't have enough rights
to create sign items for the copied template:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2e8fb2ca274a0cf15d7b78a663bffe9cbb700153/sign/security/security.xml#L92-L101

**Change**
Change the `user_id` of the new template to allow creating the sign items for it.

opw-5254566

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#105656
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#102227

*= quality_control, quality_mrp_workorder, mrp_workorder

Currently, when a user fails a quality check using the quick-action button, the failure message defined for that quality control point isn’t shown.

**Steps to produce:**
* Install `Quality` and `Manufacturing` with demo data
* Go to MRP > Configuration > Operations > Manual Assembly
* Create a pass/fail quality point with a failure message
* Create and confirm an MO for `Table Top`
* Go to Shop Floor > Activate work centers if inactive > Manual Assembly
* Fail the assembly using the quick-action button

Replication video: [Link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gBHrvQEAavhjU4lS-bKQHQjAa9qDHj6-/view?usp=sharing)

**Observed Behavior:**
* No failure message is displayed when the quality check is failed.

**Root cause:**
* This happens because pressing the quick-action button triggers `failCheck` [1] , which calls `doActionNext` [2], which then runs the server function `action_fail_and_next` [3]. That function sets `quality_state = fail` and calls [4] to get the view. But since [3] wraps that view inside a dictionary, the check in [5] never passes, so the message never appears.

**Solution:**
* Pass the view correctly to display the failure message. Since the quick action already marks the quality state as failed we can hide the Confirm and Back buttons by passing the context and checking it in the view to show a single OK button, similar to earlier versions.


**Before:**
<img width="1673" height="813" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/029e347b-5f2c-463a-833e-3b55677137b6" />

**After:**
<img width="1687" height="829" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e4c85093-ea0d-44ca-bc9c-0fab5ac08fbc" />


[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/59c06537d82fedd1916b7aeb808dc73904f6a751/quality_mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/quality_check.js#L83-L86 
[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/59c06537d82fedd1916b7aeb808dc73904f6a751/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_record_line/quality_check.js#L147-L163 
[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/59c06537d82fedd1916b7aeb808dc73904f6a751/quality_mrp_workorder/models/quality.py#L86-L89 
[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/59c06537d82fedd1916b7aeb808dc73904f6a751/quality_mrp_workorder/models/quality.py#L48-L68 
[5]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_record_line/quality_check.js#L154-L161

opw-5403465

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106829
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#102095

### Issue:
When exporting Modelo 390 reports for a past year, the BOE file was empty — all values were 0

### Cause:
In `export_boe()`, the `report_lines` were get based on the `section_report` options
However, `section_reports` do not store the date
or return periodicity of the selected report
As a result, using their options always fetched data for the current period instead of the specified year

### Note:
`_generate_mod_390_page2()` also had issues:
some lines were missing or incorrectly indexed

The mod 360 format, it strict in the structure with specific index so it may produce invalid documents

The latest documentation for mod 390:
https://sede.agenciatributaria.gob.es/static_files/Sede/Disenyo_registro/DR_300_399/archivos_25/dr390e2025.xlsx

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_es_reports` and switch to ES Company
- Create an Invoice and a Bill (Any product, Price: 100.00, Tax: 21%, Invoice Date: 01/01/2025)
- Open Tax Return, switch to Mod 390, and set year to 2025
- You should see data in the 2 first sections
- Use the gear icon, and download the BOE
- Use the gear icon to download the BOE, fill the wizard (Natural Person – Name: Test, Principal activity: Test, Activity Code: 12345), and generate the file Before the fix: all values in the BOE were 0 instead of matching the report

opw-5457374

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106795
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#104928

# Steps to reproduce:
* Install **Accounting** and **l10n_be_reports**.
* Enable **debug mode**.
* Go to **Accounting → Reporting → Belgium → Partner VAT Listing**.
* Create invoices with invoice lines with no product set on it, just a label, so that **more than 10 Belgian partners** appear in the report and ensure each partner has a **VAT number**.
* Open the report **Options** tab and set **Load More Limit** to **5**.
* Click **Load More** until all partners are visible.
* Click **Returns** and create a return for the month you have created invoices for, and submit it.
* Download the generated XML.

# Observed behavior:
* The XML file contains only the first batch of partners.
* Partners shown after clicking **Load More** are missing from the export.

# Cause:
* In v17, the XML export button was defined as:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/42ef1fe589fc4e7fe4b611736253251c44506578/l10n_be_reports/models/partner_vat_listing.py#L53-L59
* This meant clicking the button would go through the [export_file](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/42ef1fe589fc4e7fe4b611736253251c44506578/account_reports/models/account_report.py#L4927)
 method, which sets `options['export_mode'] = 'file'` before calling the export function. The test in v17 explicitly sets `export_mode = 'file'` to simulate what `export_file` does in production.
 
* In v19, the architecture changed:
  - The XML export is now triggered via the account.return workflow and a submission wizard [1.](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/l10n_be_reports/wizard/vat_listing_submission_wizard.py)
  - The wizard's `print_xml` method calls [_get_closing_report_options()](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/account_reports/models/account_return.py#L1601) which does NOT set `export_mode = 'file'`.
  - The controller then calls `dispatch_report_action(options, file_generator)` directly, bypassing `export_file`.
 
* Why the test changed:
  - In v17 test: `export_mode = 'file'` was set to mimic the `export_file` →  `partner_vat_listing_export_to_xml` flow.
  - In v19 test: `export_mode = 'file'` should NOT be needed in the test because the fix is to set `export_mode = 'file'` inside `partner_vat_listing_export_to_xml` itself.


# Fix:
* Enable **export mode** when generating the XML.
* Ensures all partners are included regardless of the load limit.

opw-5494247

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106134

Link to Avalara (Avatax) documentation:
https://developer.avalara.com/api-reference/avatax/rest/v2/models/LineItemModel/

Expected Behaviour:
The itemCode sent to the AvaTax API should be 50 characters or fewer
to comply with Avalara's field length constraints.

Actual Behaviour before the Fix:
When an itemCode exceeded 50 characters, the system attempted to send
the request as-is. This resulted in the AvaTax API returning an error,
causing the transaction or tax calculation to fail.

Behaviour with the Fix:
The system now ensures that the itemCode adheres to the 50-character
limit before the API call is made, by trancating the code to the
first 50 characters if it exceeds 50 characters. This prevents API
rejection and ensures successful tax processing for items with
long identifiers.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create or select a product/item with a reference (or barcode if
   using UPC) longer than 50 characters.
2. Trigger an action that calculates tax via the AvaTax
   integration (e.g., creating an invoice or updating a line item).
3. Observe the API response.

- Before fix: API returns a validation error regarding the
  itemCode length.
- After fix: Request is successful as the itemCode is
  properly handled/validated.

opw-5406451

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106667
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#105017

This change hides the `remaining_hours_so` field when the sales order line is linked to a subscription. Unlike standard service or time-based sales orders, where this field reflects the difference between the quantity ordered and the quantity delivered, the concept does not translate well to subscription logic.

In the context of a subscription, the service is delivered on a recurring period (monthly, yearly, etc.). Delivery quantities continuously accumulate over time, and because the subscription renews indefinitely until cancellation, the “remaining hours” calculation quickly becomes misleading. In many cases it can drift into negative values, giving the impression of an error or over-consumption when, in reality, the subscription is simply following its recurring delivery cycle.

To avoid confusing end-users and to maintain a clean, intuitive interface, we hide this field whenever the line is part of a subscription.

opw-5246238

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106807
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#99813

When trying to compute the document count
during the upgrade, we encountered a ValueError
because multiple records were found for a partner. The system expected a singleton

```
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/documents_hr/models/hr_employee.py", line 34, in _compute_document_count
    ('partner_id', '=', self.work_contact_id.id)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/19.0/odoo/orm/fields_misc.py", line 112, in __get__
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % record)
 ValueError: Expected singleton: res.partner(11393, 11612, 13026, 13085, 13066, 11674, 13007, 11240, 11420, 13086, 2687, 8998, 10309, 8195, 8468, 6439, 8151, 6580, 7928, 10301, 11058, 10515, 5274, 9243, 8141, 8435, 8889, 7761, 7733, 8443, 8545, 9252, 8457, 9980, 5495, 11424, 6458, 10558, 11070, 8924, 11731, 11528, 11615, 11766, 13021, 13080, 11758, 11742, 9306, 8826, 11004, 9393, 8879, 9317, 11652, 13075, 11744, 11160, 11644, 11763, 11416, 11618, 11732, 7931, 3846, 8442, 10299, 7916, 8429, 8057, 11061, 9342, 6435, 6553, 6512)
```

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#101902