Steps to produce:
---
- Install the `Sales` module.
- Go to `Invoicing > Configuration > Payment Terms`.
- Open `Immediate Payment` and enable Early Discount.
- Set `Reduced Tax` to `Always (upon invoice)`.
- Go to Invoicing > Configuration > Taxes.
- Create a 21% tax with `Tax included`.
- Create a product with a sale price of 7.50 and assign the tax.
- Create a Sale Order with this product > Set Immediate Payment as payment term.

Issue:
---
- The untaxed amount is computed as 6.22 instead of 6.20.

Root cause:
---
- At [1], in `_add_base_lines_for_early_payment_discount`, the base lines generated for early payment discount were missing the `special_mode='total_excluded'`.
- Consequently, the tax engine interpreted these amounts as tax-included and attempted to recompute the untaxed base, resulting in an incorrect untaxed amount.

Solution:
---
- Add `special_mode='total_excluded'` to the base lines created for early payment discount computation.
- This ensures the discount amounts are treated as already tax-excluded.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/a2b4f618328f3ce3f654fd2c1ee4410365706a7e/addons/sale/models/sale_order.py#L515-L550

opw-6023472
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260189
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255724

Currently, an error occurs if a user changes the product in a BoM, updates the manufacturing order (MO) based on that BoM, and then attempts to unbuild the order.

## Steps to replicate:
- Install Manufacturing without demo data
- Settings > Enable Variants
- Create the following products:
    - Car with (Red and Blue Color attributes)
    - Red Paint
- Create a BoM for Car and product variant set to Red Car and have Red paint as the component.
- Create and Confirm manufacturing order for Red Car
- Click on Bill of Material > Set Paint required to 2 > Save
- Set product variant in BoM to Blue and save again.
- Go back to MO > Update BoM > Produce All
- Unbuild qty 1 > Confirm

## Observed Behavior:
ZeroDivisionError: float division by zero

## Root cause:
This issue occurs because the Update BoM button remains visible on the Manufacturing Order (MO) even after the product has been changed.

The problem starts when a user initially updates the required paint quantity from 1 to 2. At that point, the function [1] marks the BoM as outdated for all linked MOs, which makes the Update BoM button appear. However, if the user later changes the product template or variant, the BoM is still considered outdated. This incorrectly allows the user to update the MO using a BoM that no longer matches the selected product.

**Why this causes a traceback when unbuilding?**

When the user clicks Update BoM, it triggers the `action_update_bom function` [2], which calls `_link_bom`. This process recomputes several fields to align the MO with the updated BoM. One of the methods triggered during this recomputation is `_compute_move_finished_ids` [3]. Since the production is already confirmed, the logic skips adding the production to `production_with_move_finished_ids_to_unlink_ids`, meaning no new finished moves are created for that updated product.

As a result, although the MO is updated, its finished product (`move_finished_ids.product_id`) still refers to the original product (for example, Red Car), instead of the newly selected one.

Later, when the user attempts to unbuild the product, the `action_unbuild` function [4] is executed, which calls `_generate_consume_moves` [5] During this step, the system tries to compute a factor that depends on `unbuild.mo_id.quantity_produced`.

However, because the finished moves still reference the old product and do not match the MO’s current product, the computed total becomes zero at [6] This leads to a division by zero error at [5], which ultimately causes the traceback.

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/444de5354dcd70e9160a985486317a8912d53a84/addons/mrp/models/mrp_bom.py#L432-L447 [2]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/444de5354dcd70e9160a985486317a8912d53a84/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1044-L1048 [3]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/444de5354dcd70e9160a985486317a8912d53a84/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L771-L800 
[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/97b60952d59a57aba12b048cb4da4f41d85d2ea2/addons/mrp/models/mrp_unbuild.py#L153-L164
[5]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/444de5354dcd70e9160a985486317a8912d53a84/addons/mrp/models/mrp_unbuild.py#L225-L232 [6]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/444de5354dcd70e9160a985486317a8912d53a84/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L641-L647

## Solution:
This change prevents users from updating a Bill of Materials (BoM) after the main product or its template has been modified, by ensuring the BoM is not marked as outdated.

This approach make sense because, once a manufacturing order (MO) is confirmed, all raw materials are physically reserved before production begins. While it makes sense to update BoM components in response to an Engineering Change Order (ECO) or last-minute specification changes, it does not make sense to allow changes to the final product itself on existing confirmed MOs. Doing so could lead to operational errors, since materials have already been procured and reserved for a specific product.

This fix ensures that if the product variant or product template is updated in the BoM, users cannot update the MO based on that BoM. This also prevents potential divide-by-zero errors when attempting to unbuild the product in the MO.

Reference commit which also suggests this behavior for the `Update BoM` button: [commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/d7392829c769ef50456a7bc93d4482072b329463#:~:text=An%20exception%20however%3A%20if%20the%20MO%20is%20confirmed%20and%20the%20BoM%27s%20product%20was%0Achanged%2C%20the%20MO%20shouldn%27t%20have%20the%20%22Update%20BoM%22%20button%20displayed.%0AOtherwise%2C%20it%20would%20change%20the%20finished%20product%20of%20a%20confirmed%20MO.)

opw-6044754

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255981

- This aggregation expression used to have 'cross_report' as subformula. Though, it was useless (since the aggregation only uses term from the same report), and the subformula was removed from the data file without explicitly resetting it to False. This became a problem in 18.3, because the cross_report syntax changes. Because of that, a migrated report failed to open, since it still was using the old syntax on that expression. We fix that by explicitly emptying the subformula.

see https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/193106

```python3
Opération invalide

Dans le rapport "Section I (LU)", à la ligne "472 - Autres Ventes / Recettes", avec le libellé "balance",
Le format de l'expression de rapport croisé est invalide.

Format attendu : cross_report(<report_id>|<xml_id>)
Exemple : cross_report(my_module.my_report) ou cross_report(123)
```

opw-6103170
upg-4166654(lu)
upg-4163103(it)
upg-4175631(ug)
upg-4177165(es)

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