### Issue:

The company used in the main barcode menu is the `company_id` of the user rather than the current contextual company of the session. This is problematic as we might endup using the wrong barcode nomenclature.

### Steps to reproduce:

- Have 2 companies: company 1 and company 2
- Set the barcode nomenclature of company 1: default, company 2: GS1
- Incarnate a user allowed in both companies but with default company 1
- With company 2, create a product and set its barcode to 36939282410106
- From the main menu open the barcode app and scan 0136939282410106
#### > No product was found (even thought it is correct in GS1)

### Cause of the issue:

Scanning from the main barcode menu will trigger a call of the `main_menu` method relying on the nomenclature of the contextual company of the request:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/804ea21c225a7a1e0763bac188f027adeb3ab78f/stock_barcode/static/src/main_menu/main_menu.js#L98-L99 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/804ea21c225a7a1e0763bac188f027adeb3ab78f/stock_barcode/controllers/stock_barcode.py#L15-L21 
However, when opening the main barcode menu from the app menu, no contextual warehouse was set to the view:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/804ea21c225a7a1e0763bac188f027adeb3ab78f/stock_barcode/views/stock_barcode_views.xml#L6-L11
As such, the environment of the request will be set here: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9393b0db6791fe5a7f576cff55705e315fb3dd11/odoo/http.py#L2083
based on the company of the user rather than the one of the context: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9393b0db6791fe5a7f576cff55705e315fb3dd11/odoo/api.py#L694-L722

### Fix:

Setting the company slices the `current_company` in first position of the `allowed_company_ids`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/260c69ed64f8663b6935b9863c86aac6dbecd961/addons/web/static/src/webclient/switch_company_menu/switch_company_menu.js#L33-L39 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/260c69ed64f8663b6935b9863c86aac6dbecd961/addons/web/static/src/webclient/switch_company_menu/switch_company_menu.js#L68-L81
which can be recovered from the cookies via the `_get_allowed_company_ids`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/43f65ff2f3c6177cc69647bbb85bb40a84409457/stock_barcode/controllers/stock_barcode.py#L432-L442 precisely used by the `_get_barcode_nomenclature`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/43f65ff2f3c6177cc69647bbb85bb40a84409457/stock_barcode/controllers/stock_barcode.py#L485-L491
Note that passing the context in the arguments of the `main_menu` JSON  route will not really solve the issue by it self since the context is no longer shared with the request: c8cd1d4a83de7a5798cbb910a788fbb6fe208d2f

### Additional Issue:

The type `dest_location` does not exist on barcode types: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/485a64b6a1e91feb4310f282c6dd1cd021f1780b/addons/barcodes_gs1_nomenclature/models/barcode_rule.py#L16-L20 so that the type used by these lines can not work: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1dedc5bbcee43bfd13e55206e3d7364f715ca9be/stock_barcode/controllers/stock_barcode.py#L29-L30 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1dedc5bbcee43bfd13e55206e3d7364f715ca9be/stock_barcode/controllers/stock_barcode.py#L52-L56

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable: Multi-Steps Routes
- Set the barcode nomenclature to GS1
- Set your warehouse in receipt in two steps and add a barcode to the WH/Input: 3033710074365
- From the main menu open the barcode app and scan 4133033710074365
#### > No product or picking was found (even thought it is correct in GS1 that should create an internal transfer with WH/INPUT as destination)

opw-5847529

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112783
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111662

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Enable "Master Production Schedule" in Inventory settings
* Create tracked Product "Child" and set up a vendor
* Create tracked Product "Parent" and set up a bom as component "Child" and Lead Time: 2 days
* Create tracked Product "GParent" and set up a bom as component "Parent" and Lead Time: 2 days
* Open MPS and add your three products:
  - Child, Parent: activate indirect demand
  - Parent: Safety Stock Target of 10
* Add 1 in the forecast demand for "Gparent" on third column -> Will have 20 Indirect Demand Forecast of Child in the first column and -9 on the second

Observation:
-------------
Usefull comment form the function :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b332af45a46b2295797a5096f68b7953554a495b/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L424-L447

When creating a demand from the MPS, it will always take the first date of the interval (ex: Week 10 (2-8/Mar), it will create the demand for the 2 of Mars)
When calculating the production schedule. we wil we calculate each product for each date_range:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ea805995f66e007c0aef6b473a2b16dbe54d73bc/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L488 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ea805995f66e007c0aef6b473a2b16dbe54d73bc/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L509

When calculating the values for a product, we will set the indirect demand qty for it component

The demand will created the demand in function of the date of when the parent need and the lead time (it will for the previous date range because of the lead time):
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ea805995f66e007c0aef6b473a2b16dbe54d73bc/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L554
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ea805995f66e007c0aef6b473a2b16dbe54d73bc/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L555

If the demand is not equal to the resplensih_qty we will create another demand to compensate, it will use the first date of range minus the lead time it will send it to the previous date range:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ea805995f66e007c0aef6b473a2b16dbe54d73bc/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L556-L560

In our case this will create the issue, since it will try to compensate each time on the previous week.

opw-5413838

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112811
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#107671

In a multicompany setting, when buying product with intercompany rule, the never variant attribute was lost.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Enable intercompany transaction
* Enable variant grid entry
* Enable multistep routes
* Unarchive MTO
* Settings>Users & Companies>Companies
* Enable Generate Sales Orders in company A
* Create a product:
    -  Never variant with at least two values
    -  MTO and manufacture
* Create a bom,
    - Company : company B
    - Add a component with apply on variant: choose one of the variants
* Create and confirm a purchase order, for a never variant of the product, in company A with vendor as company B
* Confirm the sales order in company B
-> The manufacture order does not include the components that are applied on variant

Observation:
-------------
When creating a sale order for an intercompany rule, button_approve is overwritten and it calls the function "inter_company_create_sale_order.
That function will create the sale order from the data of the purchase order:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/273528ba462f2f2b5768bf29dbdb697713a8e619/sale_purchase_inter_company_rules/models/purchase_order.py#L63-L64
When preparing the value for each order line, the attribute value for the never variant will not be retrieved:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/273528ba462f2f2b5768bf29dbdb697713a8e619/sale_purchase_inter_company_rules/models/purchase_order.py#L63-L64
Since the attribute value is lost, it will not be retrived by the mto since it should get the value from the PO.

opw-5438723

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#107122

### Steps to reproduce:
- Download Payroll app
- From the top bar 'Employees' > 'Employees', create a new employee
- From the top bar 'Work Entries' > 'Work Entries', add 2 Attendance work entries on different days, with different creation days (either wait 24h between creations, or adjust one create_date in DB)
- Click on any empty cell, you'll find the "Replace by Attendance" smart button replicated

> If you activate debug mode and click on any cell > **UncaughtPromiseError > OwlError**

### Cause of issue:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/482b4564b3a81e914d6eead9a7b85a23b7cac3dc/hr_work_entry_enterprise/static/src/work_entries_gantt_model.js#L110-L138 `formattedReadGroup` is called with both `work_entry_type_id` and `create_date:day`. If the user has created several work entries of the same type on different days, we would get multiple group results having the same `work_entry_type_id`. These duplicated records later produce an Owl crash because the button list uses `t-key="workEntry.id"`. 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/72be98d705e225f663b65e289e11d0b8642ec6f8/addons/hr_work_entry/static/src/views/work_entry_calendar/work_entry_multi_selection_buttons.xml#L16-L17

### Fix:
Since the goal of the above method is to extract the favorite work entries to later use in smart buttons and `userFavoritesWorkEntriesIds.map((r) => r.work_entry_type_id?.[0]).filter(Boolean)` extracts all the entries' `work_entry_type_id` (including duplicates), the easiest way to get rid of these duplicates is to create a `Set`.

opw-5953671

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#109986
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#109823

`has_published_products` was previously computed recursively. For recursive fields, the ORM disables prefetch optimizations.

In 3ffca1961cb1671e7028dd4dceca82d2e74a2e21, the computation switched to `_read_group` to avoid loading all published products into cache and prevent memory issues. However, this introduced an N+1 pattern when evaluating:
```python
categories.filtered(lambda categ: categ.has_published_products)
```

As a result, query count became dependent on the number of active categories, which broke SQL performance tests when demo data were installed.

This commit updates the computation again to avoid recursion and restore ORM prefetch optimizations, making the number of queries independent of the number of active categories.

This commit also removes redundant checks already enforced by ORM `ir.rule`. For example, the following pattern evaluates `has_published_products` three times: once in the user domain, once in the access rule domain added by `search`, and once in the filter.
    
```python
domain = [("has_published_products", "=", True)]
categs = self.env["product.public.category"].search(domain)
categs.filtered("has_published_products")
```

runbot-234948

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257071
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256415

Steps to reproduce:
1- Install Inventory, Purchase and Manufacturing
2- Enable 'multi-step routes' in the settings
3- Create Product A and create a Bill of Materials (BoM type: subcontracting,  Component A)
4- Repeat the same for Products [B,C] with components [B,C] correspondingly.
5- Assign the same subcontractor to all of them
6- Create a Purchase Order for both Product A and Product B with vendor as the subcontractor and confirm it
7- Add a new order line with Product C and save

Description of issue:
A second resupply picking is created

Expected behavior:
Should group the new product's component with the existing picking

Why this happens:
When assigning the resupply picking for the new product's component, the search domain for the existing picking includes production_group_id, which is different for the added product.
This prevents merging of components into a single resupply picking despite sharing the same destination and purchase order

Fix:
We ignore production_group_id since it is not necessary in the resupply stock moves domain.

opw-5906451

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#251713

**Problem:**
The cost is not correctly computed on sale order 
line when the product is dropshipped.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- enable "margins" and "dropshipping" settings
- create a tracked, fifo product with dropship route
- add a vendor in the purchase tab
- confirm a sale order for 1 unit
- set a unit price of 10 in the PO and confirm it
- validate the dropship picking
- come back to the sale order and unhide de cost column

**Current behavior:**
the cost is 0

**Expected behavior:**
the cost should be 10 based on the unit price of the PO

**Cause of the issue:**
To compute the purchase price, when there is valued moves 
linked to the sale order line and the product is fifo/avco, 
we call _get_price_unit() on the moves.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/98e6e929bf8e0c34ec77fb9d07ef253e0abf681c/addons/sale_stock_margin/models/sale_order_line.py#L21
Which uses the value of the moves
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/98e6e929bf8e0c34ec77fb9d07ef253e0abf681c/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L237-L243
But for dropshipped move the value on the moves is always 0.
So the return value will be 0 and purchase price will be 0.

**fix:**
- The idea of the fix is to use _get_value() instead of the move 
value for dropship moves. 
This approach is already used in the code inside 
_run_average_batch()
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/98e6e929bf8e0c34ec77fb9d07ef253e0abf681c/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L474-L475

- In case there is not only dropship moves we need to do 
a weighted average


opw-6051004

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256089

Steps to reproduce:
- Go to To-do
- Open a demo record (e.g., "Welcome Mitchell Admin")
- Click on an image
- Click on "Caption" from the toolbar
- Click on the image again

Description of the issue:
- When adding a caption, the parent paragraph block of sibling nodes is removed, making them direct children of the editable area.
- After adding a caption, reopening the powerbox does not show the caption button as active, allowing multiple captions to be added on the same image.

Cause:
- When the image has `display:block`, `closestBlock` returns the image itself as its closest block.
- As a result, when a caption is added to an image, its parent paragraph block is not split around the image even if the image has sibling nodes, and when `unwrapContents` is called, both the image and its siblings get unwrapped, making them direct children of the editable area.
- Since `closestBlock` is the image (and not a `<figure>`), the caption button in the toolbar is not marked as active even when a caption already exists, so clicking it again adds another caption instead of removing the existing one.

Solution:
- Instead of using the image's `closestBlock` directly, find the `closestBlock` of its parent element.
- This ensures the correct block is found even when the image has `display:block`.

task-6051549

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256436
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255064

There is a safeguard in account.tax.write prevents modifying taxes as it is forbidden to modify a tax used in a POS order not posted. This guard only applies for a predefined set of fields in account_tax.py.

After 18.0, the tax-included behavior is controlled through the `price_include_override` field instead of `price_include`. However, this field was not added in the forbidden fields, allowing users to modify tax inclusion while a POS session is open.

This bypasses the safeguard and can lead to inconsistencies, as the POS caches tax configuration at session start.

For example, changing this setting mid-session may differences between POS receipts and backend invoices.

By adding `price_include_override` to the forbidden fields,
the UserError can properly be raised.

Additional note: test_fiscal_position_between_frontend_and_backend was updated to close the POS session before changing taxes since the safeguard now correctly blocks this.

Related ticket: opw-6042367

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257035
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254487

## Versions
18.0+

## Issue
When the product configurator dialog is open, a browser tab change acts like a discard on the SOL: coming back to the Odoo tab displays the dialog but the SOL has been reverted to its previous state.

## Steps to reproduce
- Create a new SO for any customer:
  - Add a standard (non-combo/non-variant) product (e.g. "Apple Pie");
  - Save manually;
  - Change the product for a combo or variant one (e.g. "Customizable Desk");
  - With the opened dialog, change from browser tab then come back;
  - The SOL has been reset to the standard product ("Apple Pie") and confirming the dialog has no effect).

## Cause
The `beforeVisibilityChange` hook is triggered by the tab change and saves the form without updated values. This is because the hook checks for two conditions to be true: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2f00b0085574653ca1a8f734ef91893a4a1c1a7c/addons/web/static/src/views/form/form_controller.js#L479-L483 The tab change indeed changes the document's visibility to "hidden" but the controller has never been updated with the form's display in the dialog and, therefore, `this.formInDialog` is indeed equal to zero.

## Test
No test as we cannot simulate a browser tab change then come back to the first tab.


opw-5494089

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257846
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#247797