### Steps to reproduce:

- Create a kit product with 6 bom lines (with a `cost_share` of `0.0%`)
- Create + confirm a purchase order for 1 unit of the kit product at 60
- Validate the delivery

#### > 6 layers were created with values 9.99, 10, 10, 10, 10 and 10

There are two issues with purchased kit valuation addressed in this PR:

### Issue 1:

Since 8c199f7783527735b35c9fbda334cbdcd55a004f, the product price unit is not supposed to be rounded anymore. However, kit products rely on the rounded `cost_share` field of the `mrp.bom.line` to determine which part of the price of the kit product is handled by which component: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/591102ff37fef1f0b9a946fee3f9d85789653e65/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L245-L246 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/591102ff37fef1f0b9a946fee3f9d85789653e65/addons/purchase_mrp/models/stock_move.py#L28 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/591102ff37fef1f0b9a946fee3f9d85789653e65/addons/purchase_mrp/models/stock_move.py#L38

This leads to inevitable rounding issues where `60/6` does not match `10`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/591102ff37fef1f0b9a946fee3f9d85789653e65/addons/purchase_mrp/tests/test_purchase_mrp_flow.py#L1273-L1275 simply because 1/6 is represented  as `16.67%` and not by `16.66666666666666%`. However, values such as 1/6 can be obtained if you do not set any `cost_share`, since the kit explosion will equidistribute its cost share:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/591102ff37fef1f0b9a946fee3f9d85789653e65/addons/purchase_mrp/models/mrp_bom.py#L42-L48

### Fix of this issue:

We set the digits to `False` for stability reason as the columns have 
been initiallised as "numeric" values and needs to stay numeric:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b007b0a4f7e56f6dc44df3154e13745c9981eae3/odoo/fields.py#L1627-L1650

Note that when the digit is Falsy on the field, the field value is formatted to the second digit by the front end:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3542c542eac5b204e69a8dd6ae1907cfcef60af3/addons/web/static/src/views/fields/float/float_field.js#L58-L76
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/12e453302a950df4d9ee45954f54bdf610888eda/addons/web/static/src/core/utils/numbers.js#L214-L227

In particular, when we create the bom and set the `cost_share`, all possible values will be rounded to the second decimal just as before. This change will therefore only alter the rounding behavior in the DB for equidistributed values such as `16.66666666666666%`.

### Issue 2:

While the value of the kit product is exploded and distributed among components, the values of each individual `stock.valuation.layer` are themselves rounded before creation based on the company currency: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4188436a9e800b062bf9f3b0055cad86acc47e19/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L240-L255 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4188436a9e800b062bf9f3b0055cad86acc47e19/addons/stock_account/models/stock_valuation_layer.py#L30

Now, this is problematic since the sum of the values of the layers is expected to match the total value of the purchase order line (that is, the non-rounded value of the components of the purchased kit).

### Fix of this issue:

We compute and distribute the rounding error among layers corresponding to the purchased kit product before creation (since layer values are not expected to be modified afterwards), based on the non-rounded computation, since this value should now be exact (as the unit cost is not rounded anymore).

opw-5085457
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#258124
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#252034

Steps:
- Install ai
- Open ai chat
- Try to send a message
- Traceback

The AI chat was failing on iOS with a traceback when trying to process
the stream response.

Even though MDN suggests compatibility, Safari (WebKit) versions prior
to 26.4 do not implement the AsyncIterator protocol on ReadableStream.
This makes `for await (const chunk of response.body)` throw a TypeError
as `[Symbol.asyncIterator]` is undefined.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ReadableStream

This commit replaces the async iteration with a manual reader loop
(`getReader().read()`). This is the low-level primitive supported by
all versions of Safari and ensures the stream is properly consumed and
unlocked even if the connection is interrupted.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open Discuss/AI Chat on an iPad or iPhone (eg. 26.4).
2. Send a message.
3. The response triggers a JS error.

```js
Uncaught Promise > undefined is not a function (near '...chunk of asyncStream...')
```

opw-6054307

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113926

Problem: Portal email with auto-assignment crashes ticket creation due to calendar access.

When a helpdesk ticket is created via email from a portal user and automatic assignment is enabled, the system computes working intervals for users to determine assignment.

This computation goes into resource logic, where resource.calendar fields (flexible_hours) are read.

If the assigned user is linked to multiple employees across companies, multiple resource.resource records are evaluated.

The helpdesk email flow starts in sudo, but the employee calendar lookup explicitly drops sudo before returning the calendar. Then, the calendar is accessed in the portal context, which does not have permission to read the other company's resource.calendar, leading to an AccessError and preventing ticket creation.

Although the failure is triggered from Enterprise helpdesk, the actual crash occurs in Odoo (resource.calendar), meaning the fix must be applied there.

Fix: Preserve sudo when fetching employee calendars to ensure that scheduling logic does not depend on the access rights of the email sender.

A test is added in helpdesk_holidays, as the issue requires both helpdesk (auto-assignment) and hr (employees/resources) to reproduce. The test simulates a portal email flow with a multi-company user linked to multiple employees and ensures ticket creation succeeds.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Helpdesk, Employees, and enable multi-company
2. Create two companies (e.g., Company A and Company B)
3. Create one internal user (User X) with access to both companies
4. Create two employees linked to the same user:
- Employee 1 in Company A
- Employee 2 in Company B Make sure they are set with a start date, but no end date. Needs to be active employee.
5. Create a Helpdesk team in Company A
6. Add Agent X as a team member
7. Enable automatic assignment
8. Configure an email alias for the helpdesk team
9. Create a portal user
10. Send an email from the portal user to the alias

Related Ticket: opw-6035099

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261156
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257720

Problem: Portal email with auto-assignment crashes ticket creation due to calendar access.

When a helpdesk ticket is created via email from a portal user and automatic assignment is enabled, the system computes working intervals for users to determine assignment.

This computation goes into resource logic, where resource.calendar fields (flexible_hours) are read.

If the assigned user is linked to multiple employees across companies, multiple resource.resource records are evaluated.

The helpdesk email flow starts in sudo, but the employee calendar lookup explicitly drops sudo before returning the calendar. Then, the calendar is accessed in the portal context, which does not have permission to read the other company's resource.calendar, leading to an AccessError and preventing ticket creation.

Although the failure is triggered from Enterprise helpdesk, the actual crash occurs in Odoo (resource.calendar), meaning the fix must be applied there.

Fix: Preserve sudo when fetching employee calendars to ensure that scheduling logic does not depend on the access rights of the email sender.

A test is added in helpdesk_holidays, as the issue requires both helpdesk (auto-assignment) and hr (employees/resources) to reproduce. The test simulates a portal email flow with a multi-company user linked to multiple employees and ensures ticket creation succeeds.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Helpdesk, Employees, and enable multi-company
2. Create two companies (e.g., Company A and Company B)
3. Create one internal user (User X) with access to both companies
4. Create two employees linked to the same user:
- Employee 1 in Company A
- Employee 2 in Company B Make sure they are set with a start date, but no end date. Needs to be active employee.
5. Create a Helpdesk team in Company A
6. Add Agent X as a team member
7. Enable automatic assignment
8. Configure an email alias for the helpdesk team
9. Create a portal user
10. Send an email from the portal user to the alias

Related Ticket: opw-6035099

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114986
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113047

### Issue before this commit:
The "Source" (origin) field was missing from the PDF of replacement invoices. While the original invoice correctly displayed the Sales Order reference, the new invoice generated through the request cancel process had an empty origin field.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Sales and l10n_mx
2. Set a UNSPSC Category for one product
3. Go to Sales, create a new Quotation and confirm it
4. Create invoice, confirm and send & print
5. Request cancel button -> create replacement invoice
6. In the new invoice there is no source origin invoice

### Cause of the issue:
The invoice_origin field is defined with copy=False. Since the replacement logic uses the copy_data method without explicitly passing the origin value, the field was automatically cleared during the creation of the new invoice.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
To ensure document traceability, the fix explicitly passes the invoice_origin from the original invoice to the replacement. This maintains the link to the Sales Order in the database and ensures the "Source" label appears on the printed PDF.

opw-6070016

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114099

Steps to reproduce Bug 1:
  1. Login as a user with "All Timesheets" (Approver) access.
  2. Disable the "Timesheet Assistant" feature for this user.
  3. Ensure "Billing Rate Indicators" is enabled in settings.

Steps to reproduce Bug 2:
  1. Login as a user with "All Timesheets" (Approver) access.
  2. Disable the "Billing Rate Indicators" setting in company settings.
  3. Ensure "Timesheet Assistant" is enabled in settings.
 
Steps to reproduce Bug 3:
 1. Only install 'sale_timesheet_enterprise'.
 2. Go to Timesheets > Configuration > Settings.
 3. Toggle "Billing Rate Indicators" (timesheet_show_rates) or change the encoding unit (timesheet_encode_uom_id), then save and check the menus.

Issue:
1. The "Configuration" menu is hidden, preventing access to billing targets even if the user has "All Timesheets" access.
2. The "Billing Time Targets" menu is still visible inside Configuration even if the "Billing Rate Indicators" feature is disabled in the settings.
3. Menu visibility does not update immediately after saving the settings. Menus that should appear (e.g., "Employee Billing Time Targets" or "Timesheets Assistant") remain hidden, or vice versa, until the cache is cleared or the server is restarted.

Cause:
1. The `hr_timesheet_enterprise_menu_configuration` was restricted in XML to groups that excluded "All Timesheets" users.
2. The `_load_menus_blacklist` logic in Python only blacklisted billing menus for users who were both Managers and System Admins, leaving them visible to regular Approvers even when the feature was disabled.
3. The load_menus method is decorated with @ormcache and stored in the Registry LRU cache. Menu visibility depends on timesheet_show_rates and timesheet_encode_uom_id through _load_menus_blacklist. When this field is updated, the ORM does not automatically invalidate the cached load_menus result because these specific fields are not part of the configuration fields. As a result, the stale old menu remains in memory.

Fix:
- Updated XML to include `hr_timesheet.group_hr_timesheet_approver` in the Enterprise Configuration menu permissions.
- Refactored `_load_menus_blacklist` to:
    - Hide all billing-related menus for all users when the feature is disabled.
    - Hide the parent Configuration menu if it would otherwise be empty.
- Override the write method in res.company in both modules and explicitly call env.registry.clear_cache() when the relevant configuration fields are modified.

task-5428010

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#106464

# Setup
You'll need a User with :
- An active contract (for easiness of testing, a contract that started long ago with 8hrs/day)

# How to reproduce
- Create a new Time Off type with "Ignore Public Holidays" enabled
- Create a Public Holiday for Period X
- Create A Time Off request for the User for a Period Y that contains Period X
- Go to the Time Off Ledger
- Remove the Missing Hours filter and search for the dates in Period Y

Exemple of periods :
- Period X => Feb 10 2026 - Feb 10 2026
- Period Y => Feb 9 2026 - Feb 11 2026

# The problem
The "Approved Time Off" and "Difference" values are wrong.

With the given exemples, we'll see Feb 9 and Feb 11 with "Approved Time Off" values of 12hrs, which is wrong since the employee is supposed to work 8hrs a day, so he should have a time off of also 8hrs.

# Cause
The calculation for "Approved Time Off" is the following :
Divide the `number_of_hours` of a hr_leave
By the number of working days during the period of the leave

Using our exemple, we get :
`number_of_hours` = 24hrs
number of working days = 2
Approved Time Off = 24hrs / 2 => 12hrs, but we expect 8hrs

The `number_of_hours` is correct since we checked "Ignore Public Holidays" (which actually means : include the public holidays in the number of hours of a leave)

The problem is that the aggregation for the number of working days excludes automatically
public holidays, without paying attention to the value of "Ignore Public Holidays" :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5e623af55fba64e812db6bcaf06d8f7c5d08f055/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/report/hr_leave_attendance_report.py#L193-L202
Explanation for this part of the query : we only keep days where there is no record in
resource_calendar_leaves (`WHERE rcl2.id IS NULL`)  that contains that day
and that are considered public (`AND rcl2.resource_id IS NULL`)

# Proposed Solution
We add a `JOIN hr_leave_type` to be able to get the value for
`include_public_holidays_in_duration` ("Ignore Public Holidays").

Then, we make it so we exclude the Public Holidays only if that value is
false (`AND NOT lvt.include_public_holidays_in_duration`)

opw-6082422

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261259
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#258963

Steps to produce:
---
- Install `mrp`.
- Go to Manufacturing > Products > Bills of Materials.
- Click Create, select a product.
- In the Product Variant field, type any value and click "Create".

Issue:
---
Using quick create on the Product Variant field does
not create a variant of the selected product template. Instead, it
creates a completely new, unrelated `product.template`. This is because
the `create()` method on `product.product` is overridden to call super()
with context `create_product_product=False`, which suppresses direct
variant creation and forces creation through `product.template` instead,
see [1].

**Why passing `default_product_tmpl_id` does not help:**
One might expect that passing `default_product_tmpl_id` in the field
context would cause the newly quick-created `product.product` to be
linked to the already-selected `product.template`. However, because of
the `create()` override above (introduced in [commit]), the variant
creation is always redirected to `product.template`, ignoring any
`default_product_tmpl_id` passed in context. It is therefore not possible
in any case to quick-create a `product.product` that is correctly and
directly linked to the currently selected `product.template`.

Fix:
---
Disable the "Create" and "Create and Edit" options. Since there is no
way to quick-create a `product.product` that is correctly linked to the
currently selected `product.template`, the user must create the variant
directly on the product template first.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f04d79d44873d0f1c35303a1a892f3a3a394ea17/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L364-L368

[commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/7389345696720255a9d3c72ca1d9c2f4e4ecd7b8

opw-6127738
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261316
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259776

### Issue
Two bugs reported in the Barcode app / Manufacturing Order flow:

**1. UoM change after confirm leaves MO inconsistent** Changing the UoM on a confirmed MO via the Barcode app does not recalculate `product_qty` / `qty_producing`. The backend locks the UoM after confirm — the Barcode view did not.

**2. `qty_producing` reset on wizard open/close**
Typing a value in `qty_producing` then opening the "Change Qty to Produce" widget (even closing without saving) caused the typed value to vanish. Root cause: the widget's `onClose` calls `env.model.load()`, which refetches from DB and discards any unsaved form edits.

### Fix
- `product_uom_id` in the Barcode MO form is now readonly once `state != 'draft'`, matching the backend.
- `openChangeQtyWizard` now saves the record before opening the wizard, so pending edits survive the reload.

### Steps to reproduce
**UoM bug**
1. Create an MO, confirm it.
2. Open it in the Barcode app.
3. Try to change the UoM → it was editable (bug).

**Qty reset bug**
1. Open a confirmed MO in the Barcode app, go to the header product page.
2. Type a value in `qty_producing` (e.g. `3`).
3. Click the `/ X` button next to it (opens the Change Qty wizard) then close it without clicking "Set Quantity".
4. `qty_producing` reverts to its previous value (bug).

### After the fix
- UoM field is greyed out once the MO is confirmed.
- Typed value in `qty_producing` is preserved after opening and closing the wizard.

opw-5809178

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114452
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114075

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the *Inventory* (`stock`) module.
* Create a *Storable Product* and set some *On Hand* quantity.
* Go to *Inventory → Operations → Receipts*.
* Create a new receipt.
* Add the product with a *Demand* quantity (e.g. 10).
* Validate the receipt:
  * Case 1: Validate with less quantity than demand (e.g. 8) and choose *No Backorder*.
  * Case 2: Validate with more quantity than demand (e.g. 12).
* Click on *Print( Delivery Slip)*.

**Observed behavior:**
* The *Ordered Quantity* is equal to the *Delivered Quantity*.
  * Case 1 (Demand=10, Done=8):
    * Ordered = 8, Delivered = 8.
  * Case 2 (Demand=10, Done=12):
    * Ordered = 12, Delivered = 12.

**Expected behavior:**
* Case 1 (Demand=10, Done=8):
    * Ordered = 10, Delivered = 8.
  * Case 2 (Demand=10, Done=12):
    * Ordered = 10, Delivered = 12.

 **Cause:**
* Clicking on *Print* triggers `stock.action_report_delivery`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/views/stock_picking_views.xml#L156
* This renders `stock.report_deliveryslip`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/report/stock_report_views.xml#L14
* The QWeb template calls `report_delivery_document`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L288-L292
* Which relies on `_get_aggregated_product_quantities`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L157

CASE- 1
* When validating with *less quantity* and *no backorder*:
  * In `_get_aggregated_product_quantities`, `qty_ordered` is initialized to `None` and only set when `backorders and not kwargs.get('strict')`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L881
  * If no backorder exists, the condition fails and `qty_ordered` remains `None` and it come out of condition
  * where it take  quantity `'qty_ordered': qty_ordered or quantity,` https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L898
  * As a result, *Ordered Quantity* becomes equal to *Delivered Quantity*.

CASE-2
* When validating with *more quantity* than demanded:
  * `_action_done` creates an extra move using `_create_extra_move()`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1936
  * The extra move is merged back via `_action_confirm(merge_into=self)`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1878
  * The original move keeps `product_uom_qty = 10` but now has two move lines (10 + 2).
  * In `_get_aggregated_product_quantities`: Both move lines share the same `line_key`
- **ML1** → `line_key` not yet in dict → enters [if] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L880 **ML2** → `line_key` already in dict → enters `else` block https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c1000cb11da64bf317f9bd9b0ae71f6fbea910d/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L901-L903
  → `qty_ordered += 2`  →  `qty_ordered = 12`  ✗  (surplus added to demand)
  → `quantity += 2`     →  `quantity = 12`      ✓
  * The `else` branch was designed to aggregate multiple lines of the
same product (e.g. two lot lines). The bug was that it added the
**done qty** of each line to `qty_ordered` unconditionally, causing
the surplus from over-delivery to inflate the ordered quantity.

* After the fix:
  * Case 1 (Demand=10, Done=8):
    * Ordered = 10, Delivered = 8.
  * Case 2 (Demand=10, Done=12):
    * Ordered = 10, Delivered = 12.
    
*  NOTE:
Adapt the existing test case `test_kit_packaging_delivery_slip`
 to reflect the corrected behavior of delivery validation.
The test was originally introduced in this [commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/161920/changes/47da1ec13a2189e826d3b0539e6494e35990ccc1).
Its main objective is to ensure that the Delivery Slip report prints successfully

Previously, when validating a transfer with:
Delivered quantity less than the demanded quantity, No backorder created
the Ordered Quantity was being reduced(24->12) to the delivered quantity.
After the fix, the Ordered Quantity correctly remains equal(24->24) to the original demand.

<details>
  <summary>Click here to see the results:</summary>

  <p><strong>Before:</strong></p>
  <div>
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/88d24079-b278-4ef9-bff2-c7f14fe7ecb7" />
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c6181771-7d91-4ffe-9ed8-17dffac346f7" />
  </div>

  <p><strong>After:</strong></p>
  <div>
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6ed57881-8af3-42ad-94d4-7c44a5b9b00e" />
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b5506c81-3ed9-416b-8099-108a75588b13" />
  </div>
</details>

---

opw-5874759

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261612
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#250587