### Issue:
When we try to print the field service report on multiple tasks, some with worksheets, then everything is duplicated in the PDF.

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `industry_fsm` and `sale`
- Create two tasks with the same customer
- Add timesheet, products and save a worksheet on one of them (the goal is to have titles on two different pages)
- In list view select both tasks and click Report > Field Service Report
- The downloaded PDF has the report twice

### Cause:
When printing for several records then `_render_qweb_pdf_prepare_streams()` tries to split the document. If the document has more pages than the number of records [we fetch the "Outlines"](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/55a58571fbfa6a6bb0edacd6f9676382cc23630b/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_actions_report.py#L938-L954). These are the biggest sections in the document. In our case these sections are the `<h2>` tags, as there are no `<h1>`: [the main title](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6c4b88a1dfe245a63a424e3f51ff803e51ccde61/industry_fsm/report/worksheet_custom_report_templates.xml#L31-L33), [the Timesheet section title](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6c4b88a1dfe245a63a424e3f51ff803e51ccde61/industry_fsm/report/worksheet_custom_report_templates.xml#L39), etc. Then we check the pages where these titles are displayed; if we get the same number of pages as the number of records, we use them to split the report.

If not, then we [render the report for each record individually](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/55a58571fbfa6a6bb0edacd6f9676382cc23630b/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_actions_report.py#L974-L976), add them to `collected_streams`. Then add the initial report generated on the recordset and return.

These streams are later merged into one, which explains the duplication:
- Task 1 report individually generated
- Task 2 report individually generated
- Report of the recordset containing the two first reports

### Solution:
The issue was introduced by [this commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/7fc1ebd4466a2d9b4a48dfe86332b5844026c4fc) which implements the individual generation without returning. So the individual documents will always be followed by the recordset document.

This commit adds the return directly after the individual reports generation.

opw-6032935

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255581

**Steps to Reproduce:**

1. Start a new Point of Sale session from the Odoo backend.
2. Create and validate a POS order to ensure the session contains at least one transaction.
3. In the POS interface, open the menu (☰ icon) in the top-right corner.
4. Navigate to the Cash In/Out functionality.
5. Perform a cash operation:
 - Select either Cash In or Cash Out
 - Choose a Category Reason
 - Select a Type Reason
 - Confirm the operation
6. Attempt to close the POS session.

**Issue:**

In version saas-18.2, an error occurs when closing the POS session because the name of the cash move (in the Cash Register) is incorrect.

It should be formatted as:
`Hauptmarkt/00006-out-category reason-reason`

However, it is currently generated as:
`Hauptmarkt/00006-out-reason`

This happens because the method `"_prepare_try_cash_in_out_payload"` in "l10n_de_pos_cert" is not called due to an incorrect method name.

**Solution:**

The issue is resolved by renaming the method to the correct name `"_prepareTryCashInOutPayload"`.
This ensures the proper method is invoked, generates the correct cash move name, and allows the POS session to close successfully.

opw-6059143

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111597

Since its introduction (https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/76734), the "mail.catchall.domain.allowed" system parameter is normally sanitized by `_sanitize_allowed_domains` when using `set_param`.

But the method is not run when the system parameter is created manually, for example through the UI, because the current conditional logic is not triggered for write and create call.

This can be an issue if for example the use submits this value: "domain1.com, domain2.com,domain3.com"

The comma seperated list will only be split by ',', meaning that the second element is " domain2.com" (space character in front). As such, that domain will not be used as expected, since most flows using that data will end up comparing "domain2.com" vs " domain2.com", and not considering it a match.

Before this fix:
Create new record in System parameters with
key = "mail.catchall.domain.allowed"
value = "domain1.com, domain2.com,domain3.com"
-> after save, value == "domain1.com, domain2.com,domain3.com"

After this fix:
-> after save, value == "domain1.com,domain2.com,domain3.com"

OPW-5505414

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#244279

Steps to reproduce:
- Enable "Expiration Dates" in Inventory settings
- Create a storable product "P1"
  - Add 10 units with "Lot 1"
- Enable expiration dates on product P1
- Add 10 units with "Lot 2" and set an expiration date
- Create a delivery for 10 units of P1
  - Mark as "To Do"
  - Open the move line

-> "Lot 1" is automatically reserved

- Change the lot from "Lot 1" to "Lot 2" -> The expiration date is not updated automatically

- Save and reopen the move line -> The expiration date is correctly set

- Change again to "Lot 1"
- Save and reopen the move line -> The expiration date is not reset and incorrectly keeps the value from "Lot 2"

Cause:
The expiration date was only computed based on `lot_id`, ignoring the
`quant_id` used during reservation. Additionally, the value was not
reset when switching to a lot without an expiration date.

Solution:
- Add `quant_id` to the compute dependencies
- Compute the expiration date based on `quant_id.lot_id`
- Explicitly set an expiration date to today when the
use_expiration_date product is set to True and the lot doesn't have an
expiration date.

Result:
The expiration date is now correctly updated and cleared when changing lots on stock move lines.

opw-5999294

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254610

Issue:
---
Duplicate product template creates a published product which is not
expected. Duplicated products should be unpublished by default.

#### Steps to reproduce:
1- Create a product and add a eCommerce category.
2- Without publishing the product duplicate it.

Even though the original product is not published, the duplicated one
is published.
Expected: Regardless of published state of original product, the
duplicated product should not be published.

Cause:
---
This regression is introduced in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/66218 to create a `is_published`
product if `public_categ_ids` is set. However this was only supposed
to be when creating a new product using form. It makes the create
to ignore `is_published` default value even in copy.

Fix:
---
We can make sure if `is_published` is in create vals, don't force
`is_published` to be set True.

However, as `copy=False` in `is_published` field definition, it
won't be in vals in copy. By overriding `copy_data`, we can ensure
vals is present in copy.

#### Note:
`product_barcodelookup` doesn't depend on `website_sale`. However,
`product_categ_ids` is used in this module. In the test for the
same case we only run the test if the module is installed.
This would be fine as this is a post-install test.

opw-6014789

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111340

Currently an error is generated when the user tries to save a report with an empty XML format.

Steps to reproduce:
- Install web_studio and sale_management
- Sales > Studio > Reports > New > External > Type Text in report
- Save > Edit Sources > Remove full XML > Save

Error: `XMLSyntaxError:Document is empty, line 1, column 1 (<string>, line 1)`

This error occurs because line [1] in `web_editor` attempts to access nodes by using `etree.fromstring()` with an empty `view.arch`, which is empty, resulting in an error.

In earlier versions, this error was already handled by the `_check_xml` constraint, which raised a validation error when an `etree.ParseError` occurred while parsing `etree.fromstring(view.arch)` with an empty `view.arch` (see code reference [2]). However, recent changes introduced in commit [3] allow  `view.arch` to be empty. As a result, this error is no longer handled by the constraint.

This commit fixes the issue by adding a condition to prevent calling `etree.fromstring()` when `view.arch` is empty, avoiding attempts to access nodes from invalid data. It also updates the logic in the `web_studio` module's `get_xml_editor_resources` method to ensure resources are processed only when a valid view architecture is available.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8a88756bed194910bc5a47e93f0e29610dbeee1f/addons/web_editor/models/ir_ui_view.py#L367
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/75ca0fec9a0d3b1e3a05a8bf3101bbe21846ac7a/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_ui_view.py#L372-L377
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8334ea5c777e5a478f12b8bb7a2f54bcae537d0f

sentry-6288795955

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#255316

Currently an error is generated when the user tries to save a report
with an empty XML format.

Steps to reproduce:
- Install web_studio and sale_management
- Sales > Studio > Reports > New > External > Type Text in report
- Save > Edit Sources > Remove full XML > Save

Error: `XMLSyntaxError:Document is empty, line 1, column 1 (<string>, line 1)`

This error occurs because line [1] in `web_editor` attempts to access
nodes by using `etree.fromstring()` with an empty `view.arch`, which is
empty, resulting in an error.

In earlier versions, this error was already handled by the `_check_xml`
constraint, which raised a validation error when an `etree.ParseError`
occurred while parsing `etree.fromstring(view.arch)` with an empty
`view.arch` (see code reference [2]). However, recent changes introduced
in commit [3] allow  `view.arch` to be empty. As a result, this error
is no longer handled by the constraint.

This commit fixes the issue by adding a condition to prevent calling
`etree.fromstring()` when `view.arch` is empty, avoiding attempts to access
nodes from invalid data. It also updates the logic in the `web_studio`
module's `get_xml_editor_resources` method to ensure resources are processed
only when a valid view architecture is available.


[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8a88756bed194910bc5a47e93f0e29610dbeee1f/addons/web_editor/models/ir_ui_view.py#L367
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/75ca0fec9a0d3b1e3a05a8bf3101bbe21846ac7a/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_ui_view.py#L372-L377
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8334ea5c777e5a478f12b8bb7a2f54bcae537d0f

sentry-6288795955

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#88613

### Steps to reproduce:
	- Install the l10n_ae_hr_payroll module.
	- Configure at least two employees, who'll use the UAE Monthly pay structure.
	- On at least one of the employees, set the work entry source to attendance.
	- Register a paid leave time off entry, for the employee whose work entry source is set to attendance.
	- Compute a payslip batch using the UAE Monthly pay structure.
	- Go to the payslip of the employee with the work entry source set to attendance and compute the sheet again.
	- The 'Paid Leave' salary rule results, will change given that the computation of the field l10n_ae_hourly_wage is different when the computation is done for batches and individually.

### Cause:
In 'Paid Leave' rule we use l10n_ae_hourly_wage to compute its result and while computing this field we use self.worked_days_line_ids instead of record inside the loop. This leads to an issue when self has more than one payslip it will take into account all the worked days for each payslip for different employees

### Fix:
We use record instead of self to avoid taking other payslips into consideration while computing the hourly wage.

opw-5979631

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111280

# Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

From saas-18.3 onward, the pos_settle_due module introduced a new method to identify settlement lines. 
While the old method **isSettleDueLine()** is still there, 
the new **isAnySettleLine()** covers both order settlement and invoice settlement. 

This change was not reflected in the Saudi POS EDI integration during forward-porting,
which caused incorrect validation when processing POS orders containing both
regular sale lines and settlement lines.

# Current behavior before PR:

- Orders containing a mix of new sale lines and settlement lines could bypass
the intended validation.

- The validation logic relied on the old isSettleDueLine() method

# Desired behavior after PR is merged:

- Update the validation flow to use isAnySettleLine() (when available) to
correctly detect settlement lines.

- Prevent validation of POS orders that contain both settlement lines and new
sale lines.

- Ensure compatibility with newer versions of the pos_settle_due module and
restore the intended settlement validation behavior.

- Test case to ensure no regression on this feature

I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at
[www.odoo.com/submit-pr](http://www.odoo.com/submit-pr)

Currently, if a user selects an exchange difference account as a write-off but then
decides to keep the invoice open, the system still fully reconciles the invoice.

Steps to reproduce:
- Create an invoice in foreign currency
- Click 'Register Payment'
- Select company currency
- Change the amount to a lower one
- Select 'Mark as fully paid'
- Add the exchange difference loss/gain account as write off account
- Select 'Keep open'
- Click 'Create payment'

Issue:
Even though the user selected the option to create a partial payment and keep
the invoice open, it is totally reconciled with a difference booked in the
selected exchange account.

Analysis:
This occurs because the use of the exchange account as write off account
trigger a specific flow used in localization where a writeoff is not allowed.
Once the payment registration process is ongoing, the system does not check
that user kept the same choice on how to handle the payment difference.

opw-5468052

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254479
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#251965

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Make sure you have 3 companies (comp A, B and C)
- Navigate to Settings/Users & Companies/ Companies 
- for each company in the 'Inter Company Transactions' tab: 
check 'generate Sale Orders', 'generate purchase orders' and 
'synchronize Deliveries to your receipts' then select a warehouse 
and a receipt operation type

From company A
- create a storable product
- in the Purchase tab, set the company B as a vendor

From company B 
- in the Purchase tab of the product, set company C as a vendor

From company C
- set a positive on hand quantity

From Company A
- create a SO for 1 quantity of your product
- on the sale order line, unhide de route_id column and 
set it to dropship
- confirm the SO and the linked PO

From company B
- on the SO created with company A as customer (you might need to 
remove the 'my quotations filter to find it), set the dropship 
route in the route_id column of the sale order line
- confirm the SO and the linked PO

From company C
- confirm SO created with company B as customer
- validate the delivery

From company B
- validate the dropship

**Current behavior:**
the quantity delivered on the sale order line is 0 

**Expected behavior:**
it should be 1

**Cause of the issue:**
inside _compute_qty_delivered, we fetch the incoming 
and outgoing moves using _get_outgoing_incoming_moves()
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L200
There, for the move of the dropship picking, inside the 
if condition, move._is_dropshipped_returned() will be True
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L348-L354
That's because the move is going from transit to transit
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L186-L195
So it will not be added to the outgoing moves and 
qty_delivered will stay 0.

**fix**
is_dropshipped_returned should not prevent the move 
to be added to the outgoing moves if is_dropshipped() is 
aslo true (i.e. it's a transit to transit move)

opw-5023215

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255314
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254618

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Make sure you have 3 companies (comp A, B and C)
- Navigate to Settings/Users & Companies/ Companies 
- for each company in the 'Inter Company Transactions' tab: 
check 'generate Sale Orders', 'generate purchase orders' and 
'synchronize Deliveries to your receipts' then select a warehouse 
and a receipt operation type

From company A
- create a storable product
- in the Purchase tab, set the company B as a vendor

From company B 
- in the Purchase tab of the product, set company C as a vendor

From company C
- set a positive on hand quantity

From Company A
- create a SO for 1 quantity of your product
- on the sale order line, unhide de route_id column and 
set it to dropship
- confirm the SO and the linked PO

From company B
- on the SO created with company A as customer (you might need to 
remove the 'my quotations filter to find it), set the dropship 
route in the route_id column of the sale order line
- confirm the SO and the linked PO

From company C
- confirm SO created with company B as customer
- validate the delivery

From company B
- validate the dropship

**Current behavior:**
the quantity delivered on the sale order line is 0 

**Expected behavior:**
it should be 1

**Cause of the issue:**
inside _compute_qty_delivered, we fetch the incoming 
and outgoing moves using _get_outgoing_incoming_moves()
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L200
There, for the move of the dropship picking, inside the 
if condition, move._is_dropshipped_returned() will be True
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L348-L354
That's because the move is going from transit to transit
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b936b64ed0217909ff96a1b28d1370f5064be46a/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L186-L195
So it will not be added to the outgoing moves and 
qty_delivered will stay 0.

**fix**
is_dropshipped_returned should not prevent the move 
to be added to the outgoing moves if is_dropshipped() is 
aslo true (i.e. it's a transit to transit move)

opw-5023215

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111632
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111108

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the `quality_control` module.
* Create a storable product.
* Configure a Quality Control Point:
  * Set Control per : Quantity.
  * Set Operation Type to Receipts.
  * Set Product to the created product.
* Create a Receipt for the product with a demand of  5 units.
* Confirm the receipt and mark it as To Do.
* Click on the Quality Check button.
* Click on Fail and set the failed quantity to 3.
* Click on Confirm.

**Observed behavior:**
* A new stock move is created for the failed quantity.
* The original move is split incorrectly:
  * First move: 2 `product_uom_qty` and 2 `quantity`.
  * Second move: 2 `product_uom_qty` and 3 `quantity`.
* The failed move has a demand of **2** instead of **3**.

**Cause:**
* Clicking on *Quality Check* triggers `check_quality`, 
which opens the wizard `action_open_quality_check_wizard`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/90567af2703a3928c35814a0c4862b4cd98b8432/quality_control/models/stock_picking.py#L79-L82
* Clicking on *Fail* triggers `do_fail`, opening the confirmation wizard: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/90567af2703a3928c35814a0c4862b4cd98b8432/quality_control/wizard/quality_check_wizard.py#L85-L88
* Clicking on *Confirm* triggers `confirm_fail`, which calls `_move_line_to_failure_location`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/90567af2703a3928c35814a0c4862b4cd98b8432/quality_control/wizard/quality_check_wizard.py#L97
* In `_move_line_to_failure_location`, a new stock move 
is created for the failed quantity: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/90567af2703a3928c35814a0c4862b4cd98b8432/quality_control/models/quality.py#L480
* The demand quantity is computed using the minimum of the 
failed quantity and the move line quantity.
* This leads to an incorrect demand of *2* instead of *3*.
* However, the move line quantity was already reduced by the failed quantity: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/90567af2703a3928c35814a0c4862b4cd98b8432/quality_control/models/quality.py#L472

**Fix:**
* Ensure that partial failures properly split stock moves with 
correct `product_uom_qty` and `quantity` values.

---

opw-5492095

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112005
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#107493

Issue
-----
When processing batches in barcode, scanning a BC with a different SN than the reserved one does not lead to creating a new lot in stock. The reserved one is still the one getting taken regardless of setting.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Enable GS1 nomenclature, lots & batches
- Go to Inventory > Configuration > Operation Types > Delivery Orders
    - Enable Lots/Serial Numbers > Create New
- Create a product
    - Barcode 23456789012344
    - Tracked by SN
    - 1 in stock (SN 1234)
- Create a delivery for the product and add it to a batch
- Open the batch in barcode
- Scan 012345678901234410BATCHSN1
- Confirm the delviery
- Go back to the picking and see the lines' details

> The line used the reserved SN

Cause
-----
The existing line gets matched in `_findLine`

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/45d3a537c3b2eaccee425d959e89d26229e376cd/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1085

because none of the conditions before

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/45d3a537c3b2eaccee425d959e89d26229e376cd/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1402

get matched. This is unexpected but necessary for batches, as it ensures barcode correctly swaps to the correct picking in the batch. If the line was not matched we would be creating a new line in the same picking than the last scanned line, regardless of which picking the reservation is made in.

Because a line is matched, we have to force its' `lot_id` to `false` so that the new one gets created (`lot_name` is used for display but `lot_id` takes precedence).

-----
Ticket:
opw-5216921

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111799
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#109671