**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Expenses
- Activate "Incoming Emails" in the settings
- Configure the expense Alias
- Configure an "Incoming Mail Server"

- Create a Branch for a company
- Create a User:
  * Email Address: [an existing email address]
  * Allowed Companies: [the parent company + the branch company]
  * Default Company: [the branch company]
  * User Types: Internal User
- Create an employee for the user in the parent company

- From the email address, send a PDF to the expense alias

**Issue:**
The expense is not created in the database due to a UserError: "Incompatible companies on records".

**Cause:**
When the email is received and treated, the system tries to create an expense.
From the email address, it retrieves an employee that is linked to the expense.
For the company of the expense, if a user is linked to the employee, it takes the default company of the user.
Otherwise, it takes the company of the employee.
In this case, the company set on the expense is the default company of the user (i.e. the branch company) and the employee set on the expense belongs to the parent company ; which triggers the UserError during the company check.

**Solution:**
Always use the company of the employee, even if there is a user linked to the employee.

opw-5346809




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253313
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#249415

This issue occurs on Single App and Single L10n, without demo data

### Summary
This part of the test verifies that the sub line totals are calculated correctly, which from 18.3 requires the stock.group_production_lot setting to be active. Specifically, it validates that the sum accurately reflects the Unit of Measure (UOM) across various packagings.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/93e3c6f13fbab8d54694648d04908e451f1e97fc/stock_barcode/static/tests/tours/tour_test_barcode_flows_picking.js#L6472-L6498

### Observation
The grouping logic is contingent on the stock.group_production_lot setting. If this setting is inactive, the system fails to group lines, preventing the calculation of the aggregate total.

Without the production lot group active, the conditional checks will bypass the grouping process:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d664e1f97f6e7fa462b4cf1806322a54762c0de4/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L53 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d664e1f97f6e7fa462b4cf1806322a54762c0de4/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L224-L225 

When the demo data are enabled [the group is implied](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8a7ca8beac521f41faf79a6022935fdbb605de76/addons/stock/data/stock_demo.xml#L185-L187)


### Impact
When stock.group_production_lot is disabled:
 - Lines remain ungrouped.
 - The total sum of the grouped line is never generated.
 - The test fails as it cannot find or validate the expected sub-line totals.

This issue originate from the 18.3 forward port of this [commit](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/84d4b1f144e8a437fe76ec5ef3bc9799cdf993b0) 
runbot-241109

## Issue:
When computing the product tree, the system would use `_bom_find` to find the BoM. However, it's possible to have multiple BoM for the same product, and the user should have chosen which BoM he wants to use. `_bom_find` ignores the user configuration in MPS, and simply select the first (oldest) BoM in the list. This means that the components in the MPS would not be correctly updated.

---

## How to reproduce:


https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c7e6f4d4-332a-4e2b-a40a-1b831daeb6c8


- Create Products FNS & CMP
- Create BoM for FNS without bom line (V1)
- Create BoM for FNS with CMP in bom lines (V2)
- Add FNS to MPS using bom V2
- Set Forecast Qty of FNS to 10 
- => Indirect Demand Qty for CMP is not shown (because it's 0)

---

## Test Result without fix:
```
2026-03-05 15:00:24,601 52396 INFO oes_test_18.0 odoo.addons.mrp_mps.tests.test_mrp_mps: Starting TestMpsMps.test_indirect_multiple_boms ... 
2026-03-05 15:00:24,742 52396 INFO oes_test_18.0 odoo.addons.mrp_mps.tests.test_mrp_mps: ====================================================================== 
2026-03-05 15:00:24,742 52396 ERROR oes_test_18.0 odoo.addons.mrp_mps.tests.test_mrp_mps: FAIL: TestMpsMps.test_indirect_multiple_boms
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/Odoo/src/18.0/enterprise/mrp_mps/tests/test_mrp_mps.py", line 1556, in test_indirect_multiple_boms
    self.assertEqual(forecast_cmp['forecast_ids'][0]['indirect_demand_qty'], 10)
AssertionError: 0.0 != 10
 ```

---

OPW-5979738

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#109693

__

## Error description
The test fails when it is launched at 23h.
We obtain an assertion error:
`AssertionError: datetime.datetime(2026, 2, 26, 11, 0) != datetime.datetime(2026, 2, 25, 11, 0)`

## Origin of the issue
In the `_default_start_datetime()` method of planning, we return `return datetime.combine(fields.Date.context_today(self), time.min)`. So, we call context_today. which is implemented this way: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f3ec2aa4514c03874aae96ae975e2617e8260c72/odoo/orm/fields_temporal.py#L154-L158 Let's say the hour of the test is 23h50 in GMT+0. The slot will be created at 23h50 in GMT+0. But if the time zone of the environment is set at GMT+1, at the moment of the `_compute_datetime`, we will call this piece of code, where we will translate 23h50 to GMT+1, we will obtain 00h50, then only return the day, which offsets the result of one day in the future.

X-original-commit: d91c53869842f65a60088ffa101f67404af6e58e

note:
backport of
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/108891

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#110126

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install `l10n_de, website_sale and appointment` modules.
- Create a website for the `DE company` and make it default.
 (simply place it first in the sequence.)
- From settings enable `Automatic Invoice` and `Discounts, Loyalty & Gift Card`.
- Go to the appointment module and create a new appointment for the DE company.
- In the options tab, enable `Up-front payment` and publish it.
- Create a new gift card program and generate a gift card to test (should cover the entire cost of the appointment booking).
- Now go to an Incognito tab, go to the appointment, and book the currently created appointment. When confirming the order, use the gift card and then confirm the order.

**Issue:**
- When you confirm the order, an access error occurs.

**Root cause:**
- Since automatic invoicing is enabled, at [1] the method
  `get_product_accounts` is called for the DE company.
  Inside this method at [2], self.sudo(False) is used, which removes the
  elevated access rights. As a result, the `Public product template` record
  rule is triggered, and because the public user cannot access the product,
  an AccessError is raised.
- In this [commit], we can see that `sudo(False)` was added when coming from
  the stock flow because the stock valuation layer was being created as sudo.

**Solution:**
- Instead of adding `sudo(False)` in **l10n_de**, we can apply `sudo(False)`
  at the point where the **stock valuation layer** is created using `sudo()`.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9d5d5c08f950d32bf61c2186181e8eddad9036da/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py#L603-L604
[2]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9d5d5c08f950d32bf61c2186181e8eddad9036da/addons/l10n_de/models/datev.py#L20

[commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/236931/changes/0919774791bb998954b870798c88843f999f2de4

opw-5483472
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253131
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#246920

### Steps to reproduce:
	- Create a Overtime hours time off type
	- Create mutliple allocations with different start dates but no end date
	- Create some leaves for the created allocations one after each allocation start date
	- Compare the number of hours remaining for the allocations' employee in his time off dashboard and in the Balance report.

### Cause:
After this commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/245860/changes/d9bb4d206e91d10eac7311adede307b8c5019213 we changed the way we match leaves with allocations but we were strict that the leave has to lie in between the allocation dates and this created a wrong accumlated taken_hours in the taken_per_allocation subquery.

### Fix:
Following the same approach we use in  if
the allocation has no expiry date we don't check if the leave.date_to > allocation.date_from as we are going to treat all allocations as they form one big allocation that started in the earliest start date

opw-5474596

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#251704
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#250432

Steps to reproduce in local:
1. Install `website_sale_stock`
2. Make a product variant with an image
3. To make it easy set field `Back in stock Notifications`'s value on this product with the help of the studio
4. Add a person to receive notification in this field
5. Don't set Outgoing email server
6. Run cron `Product: send email regarding products availability` manually
7. To Check sent email go to `Setting > Technical > Email > Emails`

Issue:
- The image is a full-size image


<table>
    <tr>
        <th style="text-align: center;">Before</th>
        <th style="text-align: center;">After</th>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td style="text-align: center;">
            <img width="1395" height="728" alt="Before" 
                 src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a3fe3b38-c4a5-4a78-a63a-552c96cfdf84" />
        </td>
        <td style="text-align: center;">
            <img width="1383" height="662" alt="After" 
                 src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8c346302-4295-44f2-8172-6a01072b23c7" />
        </td>
    </tr>
</table>

opw-5915587

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#249000

steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Install Time Off
2. Go to Configuration > Accrual Plans
3. Create an accrual plan:
   * Set the accrued gain time to "At the start of the accrual period"
   * Set the carry-over time to "At the start of the year"
4. Create a milestone:
   * Set the number of accrued days to 1
   * Set the accrual frequency to "monthly" and the carry over to "None.Accrued time reset to 0"
5. Go to Management > Allocations
6. Create an allocation:
   * Set the start date to 2025-01-01
   * Set the accrual plan to the one created above
7. Use future allocations to check accruals

current behavior:
-----------------
- On 2026-01-01 --> accrued days = 1  (correct)
- On 2026-02-01 --> accrued days = 1  (should be 2)
- On 2026-03-01 --> accrued days = 2 (delayed accrual, off by one month) 

cause of the issue:
-------------------
Commit 30c7011 introduced a condition that accrues time off on the carry over date:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1416aad902a97ce56aaecc2aadc4dd9f7814ee53/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave_allocation.py#L559

This incorrectly evaluates accruals across the carry over period instead of restricting to the current month, causing February accruals to be skipped.

**Reason February accruals are skipped:**
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/dcb072f675c5630327d27d785b86e1ec8e2d442d/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave_allocation.py#L559-L561
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/dcb072f675c5630327d27d785b86e1ec8e2d442d/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave_allocation.py#L541-L544

* After January, the last_executed_carryover_date is set to 2026-01-01.
* Therefore, February uses last_executed_carryover_date = 2026-01-01.
* The condition evaluates as true for February:
```python3
last_executed_carryover_date <= allocation.nextcall <= carryover_period_end
2026-01-01 <= 2026-02-01 <= 2026-02-01
```
As a result, the February accrual is skipped.

**Why it works correctly in March:**
* After February, the last_executed_carryover_date is updated to 2027-01-01.
* March now uses this updated date:
```python3
last_executed_carryover_date <= allocation.nextcall <= carryover_period_end
2027-01-01 <= 2026-03-01 <= 2027-02-01
```
The condition is not satisfied, so accruals are processed correctly.

solution:
----------
Add a condition to check if the loop has already run for the current carryover 
period. This ensures the system avoids applying the carryover twice,
allowing subsequent accruals to process as expected.


opw-5020834

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253153
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#227646

Steps to reproduce:
===================
1. Open the To-do app and pick any task.
2. In the description add text and an icon with a bg color.
`(you can add this: <i class="fa rounded rounded-circle fa-user
bg-o-color-1 fa-4x" contenteditable="false">​</i>)`
3. Select all and click "Remove format".

Result:
-> Traceback due to an infinite loop.

Cause:
======
Remove format calls `removeAllColor()`, which loops forever at:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/626bde21a25366d0bb29662bae2057c247a1638e/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/font/color_plugin.js#L194-L194

Why:
_applyColor doesn't remove the icon's background class, so
hasAnySelectedNodeColor keeps returning true and the removal loop
never terminates.
This happens because `font` is already the `<i>` element with the `fa`
class, using `querySelectorAll` on it won't include the element itself,
so the icon is never checked or updated.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6cdc6f55886ea48e90f9023a6c6142bf072745b9/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/font/color_plugin.js#L290

Solution:
=========
Check if the font itself has the fa class before doing the
`querySelectorAll`, and include it in the nodes to check for color.

Test Impact:
============
Before this fix, a `<span>` containing an icon was wrapped in a `<font>`
when applying color, treating the icon as a normal span (without size)
instead of applying the color directly.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8792c2d38eb0aadac8d778d83fd76f270404ecd5/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/font/color_plugin.js#L397

opw-5928627

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#248449

To reproduce:
- Register your company on Peppol (even sender).
- Change the VAT on your company (will be done if you choose your document layout).
- Send an invoice on the network 
- => The invoice will be refused by the AP.

The issue is that the EAS and Endpoint are automatically re-computed when you write on the VAT. It causes issues as the UBL will be filled with the values on the partner, resulting in a non-synchronised SBD and UBL, which will result in all new invoices to be in error.

Their only solution would be to revert back the EAS/Endpoint on the partner, which will sometimes be blocked meaning they have to un-register->re-register

Also adapt the query count, as we need to do a search in each compute.

opw-5923552
opw-5924552

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#252549
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#249017

Problem
------------------------
When an employee has approved leaves, and a group leave is created that overlaps with the approved leave and overrides it, the duration of the new group leave is not computed correctly. The duration does not include the overridden days. To reproduce:
1. Create allocated leave for employee and approve and validate it.
2. Go to Management > Time Off and create a group leave for the employee that includes the approved time off dates. The dates of all leaves are updated correctly, but the duration of the group leave is incorrect.

Objective
---------------------------
Even though conflicting leaves were correctly split in the multi leave generation wizard, the resource.calendar.leaves table was not synchronized within the same transaction. Because the leave types required allocation, the duration was computed by subtracting the old time off days from the new leave's duration, since they were treated as unavailable.

Solution
--------------------------
Manually unlink the resource.calendar.leaves records associated with the conflicting leaves before calculating the new duration. The clears the employee's schedule in the database so that the dates are correctly processed as available. The calendar blocks for the remaining days of the approved time off and the new group leave are generated when the leaves are created.

Task: 5911074





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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#249527

Backport of 0432a982dfea6e68419f137502c018c0a9241181

### Steps to reproduce:

1. In the settings enable: Multi-steps route
2. Put your warehouse in 2-step deliveries
3. Create a kit product:
   - With one component
   - There is one component in the stock
4. Create and confirm a SO with 1 x K
5. Process the pick and ship
6. Return the delivery
7. Set the sol qty to 0

### > Two unexpected pickings are created to put the kit in output

Decreasing the sol quantity to 0 will call the `_action_launch_stock_rule` in order to create and run procurements related to that quantity change. However, the quantity currently handled by other procurements is determined here by the
`_compute_kit_quantities`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87e176ad76c9d7b87cd622ae38a8b9a62813b1cb/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L388 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87e176ad76c9d7b87cd622ae38a8b9a62813b1cb/addons/sale_mrp/models/sale_order_line.py#L154-L166 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87e176ad76c9d7b87cd622ae38a8b9a62813b1cb/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L578-L580
Now, the issue is that `_compute_kit_quantities` does not handle move chains properly, as all delivery moves contribute to the `incoming_qty` and all return moves contribute to the `outgoing_qty`. This results in an `incoming_qty` of 1 (for the pick) + 1 (for the ship) and an `outgoing_qty` of 1 (for the 1-step return), that is a `qty_processed` of 1. As a result, the procurement will be generated for a quantity of `0 - 1` (rather than 0):
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87e176ad76c9d7b87cd622ae38a8b9a62813b1cb/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L388-L402 which leads to the unexpected picking creations.

opw-6006543

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253061