Behavior before:
Opening the inventory valuation report on databases with 300k+ products
(storable) caused an out-of-memory (OOM) error, making the report completely
unusable at this scale.

Behavior after:
The inventory valuation report loads successfully and efficiently for 300k+
products without any memory errors or RAM spikes.

Root Cause:
In `_get_accounts_by_product()`, querying all storable products creates a massive
recordset. When iterating through this recordset, the call to `_get_product_accounts()`
accesses various relational and property fields (like categories and accounts).
Because standard ORM prefetching was active, accessing these relational fields on the
first loop iteration triggered a massive batch-fetch for all 300k+ products in the
recordset simultaneously. This cascading prefetch overloaded the environment cache
and caused an immediate OOM crash.

Fix:
Wrapped the `_get_accounts_by_product()` call in `with_context(prefetch_fields=False)`.
This disables the greedy batch-loading behavior across the entire recordset. The ORM
now fetches the required relational accounting fields surgically, record-by-record
inside the loop, maintaining a minimal memory footprint and preventing the crash.

Benchmark:

| Products Count | Memory Before  | Memory After | Time Before | Time After |
|------------------------|-------------------------|----------------------|------------------- |----------------|
| 300k+                  | Memory Error     | 1.1. GB             | 46.63 s           | 1.9 m         |
| 200k                    | Memory Error     | 566.4 MB         | 1.2 m              | 1 m            |
| 100k                    | 873.1 MB             | 286.8 MB         | 36.74 s            | 32.15 s      |
| 50k                      | 442.1 MB             | 145.6 MB         | 18.96 s            | 17.65 s      |

opw-5462037



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#253331

Steps to produce:
---
- Install `Sales` module.
- Go to `Sales > Configuration > Sales Orders > Quotation Templates`.
- Create a new template and add a section.
- In the section name, add text with line breaks using `Shift + Enter`.
- Go to sale orders > Create new SO > Set quotation template created above.

Issue:
---
- Line breaks entered in the quotation template section lines are stripped when the template is applied to a sale order. These intentional sections are meant to be single-line titles; users should create a new section instead of using line breaks within one.

Root cause:
---
- At [1], the `name` field is defined without the `section_and_note_text` widget. This widget is responsible for rendering section lines as a `CharField` instead of a `TextField`, as seen at [2].

Solution:
---
- Add `widget="section_and_note_text"` to the `name` field. This ensures section lines consistently use `CharField`, preventing line breaks from being entered.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/951b44c0ed5ffb90cff6fa2934ca2664d2faa59d/addons/sale_management/views/sale_order_template_views.xml#L96
[2]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/951b44c0ed5ffb90cff6fa2934ca2664d2faa59d/addons/account/static/src/components/section_and_note_fields_backend/section_and_note_fields_backend.js#L79-L86

opw-6034255
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256058

Problem:
In RTL websites, the table row menu is not placed correctly.

Cause:
The `inlineStartOffset` calculation in `table_menu` depends on the
`direction` parameter, which was not passed during the editor
initialization.

Solution:
Ensure the `direction` parameter is properly passed during editor
initialization so the `inlineStartOffset` is computed correctly in
RTL layouts.

Before:
<img width="1091" height="682" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/964903b2-d33b-48aa-86c2-632cc5adac9a" />
After:
<img width="1093" height="658" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/846fd39c-1114-408d-a1f4-75b27218b9b0" />


Steps to reproduce:
- Change website language to Arabic.
- Add a text block and insert a table inside.
- Hover over the first table row.
- Observe the row menu is misplaced.

opw-6049260

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256045

# How to reproduce
- Go to the chart of account
- Archive any record (e.g. Code 101401)
- Search with the filters :
	- Inactive Accounts
	- Account: 101401 (the code of the record)

 # The problem
 The record that we searched for is not shown

 # Cause
The domain for  the "Account" filter is the following : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87c5f562e32ffb58359cf068124e03ead1a5859c/addons/account/views/account_account_views.xml#L147

And this is the domain for "Inactive Accounts":
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87c5f562e32ffb58359cf068124e03ead1a5859c/addons/account/views/account_account_views.xml#L159

This is correct and the search should return what we wanted, but the code's search is overriden by:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/87c5f562e32ffb58359cf068124e03ead1a5859c/addons/account/models/account_account.py#L383-L384

And the search with the `code_store` domain only explicitely looks for accounts that are active, so our "[('active', '=', False)]" is essentialy ignored

This is fixed in 19.1 because this commit (https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/de959adf7c806e09864b52fec78d981e66804280) replaced the custom search by a `compute_sql`

# Proposed solution
We change the search with the `code_store` to look for records that are both active and inactive, since the active value will be handled by the parent search

opw-6059404

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256939
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256060

How to reproduce :
- Create a product
- Create an attribute with a value set to "free text"
- Add 2 different vendors to the purchase tab of the product with different Vendor Code and/or Vendor Name
- Put Dropship as the route for the product to create a PO on a SO confirmation
- Create a SO with that product
- Confirm the SO and go to the PO
- Change the vendor in the SO

The problem :
The Vendor Code and/or Vendor Name does not change correctly in the product description

Why :
The way the description generation for a change in a purchase order line works as follows : Create a collection of default descriptions based on the product and the different vendors. If the collection contains the current description, it means the description was not changed by the user and it can be modified. This is done to prevent resetting a custom description made by an user.

This logic is pretty broken because the code that generate the description when going from a PO to a SO and the code that generate the description when changing the PO partner are different. This makes it so the current description is almost never found in the list of default descriptions.

It looks tempting to try to "resynchronize" those part of the code so the description generation is the same in both cases. This would be done by overriding the _get_product_purchase_description method in the purchase_stock module and using the product_description_variants field. Sadly, this does not work because it conflicts with the purchase_product_matrix module and its own override of that method.

The fix that I implemented checks that the Vendor Code and Name are the right one every time the description is computed following a change.

opw-5888233

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256665
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#247330

The AVCO audit report currently recalculates the AVCO value on outgoing moves. Based on the logic in `run_average_batch()`, it should instead use the AVCO value computed on the last ingoing move to recalculate the
`added_value`.                                                         

On the other hand, the `added_value` should not be recomputed from the AVCO value on ingoing moves.

Source of those changes: [245141](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/245141)

Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Create a new product. Do not assign it to a category yet.
2. Set the cost (standard_price) to 10$ on the product form.
3. Add 10 units to inventory.
4. Sell and deliver 5 units to a customer.
5. Purchase 10 units at 25$/ea and validate the receipt.
6. Sell and deliver 5 units to a customer.
7. Assign the product to category with AVCO cost method.
8. Go to the AVCO justification report:
    - The added value on the purchase is incorrect: 200$ instead of 250$.
    - On the last delivery: the added value is -125$ and the AVCO increases from 20$ to 25$.

Ticket: opw-5921104

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#252239

When users would follow the following step as they are makeing a private task,  they would be hit by an incorrect access error.

Steps to reproduce:
1.Open the form view to create a new task.
2.Clear the Project field. When empty, it should display the Private placeholder. 3.Ensure no user is assigned to the task.
4.Create the private task.
5.An access rights error occurs, stating that the user does not have permission to create the record.

⚠️ Note:
This access rights error only occurs when the task is created directly as private. If a task is created normally and then its project_id and user_ids are removed afterward, no access rights error occurs.

Root cause:
When a task is created without a project_id and without assigned users, Odoo checks access rights on creation. Since no project members or assigned users exist, no user has access to the record, including the creator. This results in an access rights error during creation.

This issue does not occur when modifying an existing task because, after creation, the creator is automatically added as a follower. As a follower, the creator retains access to the task even if it has no project and no assigned users.

Fix (implemented):
Tasks that have no assigned users and are not linked to any project (private tasks) did not make sense, as they were effectively assigned to nothing.
To address this, we now require at least one user to be assigned to a task when it is not attached to a project.  This change was made inside of the "project_task_view.xml" file in the "view_task_form_2" record


Versions : 17.0 -> master
Task [5403926](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/4105/tasks/5403926)
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257050
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#242216

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#256009
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255316

Steps to reproduce:
===================
- Add a Popup snippet to a page
- Remove all links/buttons inside the popup
- Save and wait for the popup to appear
- Press ESC

-> Nothing happens.

Cause:
======
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/a922c31fa7ccd1107b31287ab1f75697fae874f8/addons/website/static/src/snippets/s_popup/000.js#L219-L226 when the popup contains  no tabbable elements, `this.el.focus()` was called. `this.el` refers to the `.s_popup` div, not the `.modal` element that Bootstrap monitors for keyboard events. As a result, the ESC keydown event never reached Bootstrap's handler and the modal stayed open.

When focusable elements (links, buttons) were present, `tabableEls[0].focus()` correctly focused an element inside `.modal`, so ESC worked fine in that case.

Solution:
=========
Replace `this.el.focus()` with `this.el.querySelector(".modal").focus()` so focus lands on the `.modal` element allowing Bootstrap's built-in ESC handler to fire correctly in all cases

opw-5891054

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254284
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#250050

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Mail Marketing app
- Change user language to a RTL language (such as Arabic)
- Create a marketing campaign with RTL content
- Send it
- Mail received changes from RTL to LTR

**Issue:**
Conversion doesn't take into account the current
language direction anymore when creating the inline
styling. This keeps the mails in the default format ('ltr').

Previously the inline conversion was using the `/portal/static/src/scss/portal.scss`
to set the html body text direction using the `rtlcss` library:
```css
 // Frontend general
body {
    // Set frontend direction that will be flipped with
    // rtlcss for right-to-left text direction.
    direction: ltr;
}
```
It was used during the inline conversion in a `CSSStyleRule`
after loading the doc sheets, and added with the `.o_layout` selector:
```js
if (selector === "body") {
    // The top element of a mailing has the class
    // 'o_layout'. Give it the body's styles so they can
    // trickle down.
    cssRules.push({
        selector: ".o_layout",
        rawRule: subRule,
        specificity: 1,
    });
}
```
But recent refactor reworked the styling assets used by
this process, which removed this behavior.

**Fix:**
Keep style `direction` (instead of `dir` attribute) like
before, to avoid compatibility issues in mail engines.
This is done by reapplying the body rule on the
mass_mailing iframe styling, but it could also be manually
added to the fragment itself using the editor current config
or localization.

related: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/354b8f60dbabcfac690d90bf657592e1347e4f86

opw-5982854

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255628

# How to reproduce
- Add a new website page with a title that ressembles a phone number (3-14 does the trick even though it does not really look like a phone number)
- Go to another page in edit mode
- Select a button
- In the "Enter URL, /page, or #anchor" input, write the url to your page (/3-14)
- Click on Apply

# The problem
Instead of a link to our page, the button has a link with a tel: protocol.

# Cause
When clicking on the Apply button, the `applyDeducedUrl()` function will be run.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/892b15963625acc89b7ed7b1c6f94392111df6be/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/link/link_popover.js#L294

That function will change the selected url with the URL deduced from `deduceURLfromText()` if any is found. In our case "/3-14" matches the `PHONE_REGEX` pattern so the url is prefixed with the tel: protocol.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/892b15963625acc89b7ed7b1c6f94392111df6be/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/link/utils.js#L71

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/892b15963625acc89b7ed7b1c6f94392111df6be/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/link/utils.js#L34

That regex is a bit too permissive and allows our "/3-14" to be matched even though it starts with "/".
Side note : cases like "( )", "...", "--)" are also a match, which is not really an issue because they do not really represent anyting but it shows that the regex is not strict enough.

# Proposed solutin
We edit the regex to make it so it only matches strings that have atleast a digit and where the first character (after "+") is a digit or "("

opw-6047571

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255877