Steps to reproduce
1. Open any kanban view declaring a <progressbar> (e.g. Project > Tasks, or Field Service > My Tasks).
2. Group by a date or datetime field with a granularity (e.g. Creation Date: Year, planned_date_begin:day).
3. Have records spread across several groups with different state values (done, in progress, canceled, ...).
4. Observe the colored progress bar at the top of each column.

Issue
Every column's progress bar renders as a uniform grey block regardless of the actual state distribution of its records. The effect is visible only when grouping by a date/datetime field; grouping by stage or assignees still works.

The kanban relies on two separate RPCs whose keys must match: formatted_read_group (used by web_read_group) returns the columns the client stores, and the client uses each column's formatted groupby value as the lookup key; read_progress_bar returns a dict mapping that same key to per-state counts.

For a datetime group by with a time granularity,
formatted_read_group goes through _web_read_group_groupby_formatter, which localizes the naive timestamp in the user's timezone and then converts it to UTC before strftime, see
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d80ed39a2b6250bc5dfbe1f0fe4c84cc1b778ce/addons/web/models/models.py#L698-L726. On the client, serializeDateTime also formats in UTC, see https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d80ed39a2b6250bc5dfbe1f0fe4c84cc1b778ce/addons/web/static/src/core/l10n/dates.js#L455-L462, so group.serverValue is the UTC-shifted string the server sent, e.g. "2025-01-01 08:00:00" for a Pacific-tz user on a 2025-year group.

read_progress_bar called _read_group directly, which returns the raw naive datetime out of date_trunc, see
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d80ed39a2b6250bc5dfbe1f0fe4c84cc1b778ce/odoo/orm/models.py#L1764, so its dict was keyed by str(datetime(2025, 1, 1, 0, 0)) = "2025-01-01 00:00:00". The UTC-formatted key the client looks up in _pbCounts[groupValue], see
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d80ed39a2b6250bc5dfbe1f0fe4c84cc1b778ce/addons/web/static/src/views/kanban/progress_bar_hook.js#L69, never matched, per-state counts stayed at zero, and the synthetic "Other" bucket with color "200" (grey) absorbed the whole group.count, see
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d80ed39a2b6250bc5dfbe1f0fe4c84cc1b778ce/addons/web/static/src/views/kanban/progress_bar_hook.js#L88, hence the uniform grey bar.

Non-date groupbys (many2one, selection, boolean) are unaffected because their keys are scalar ids / selection codes that round-trip identically on both sides. The "None" column also works because both sides emit the literal string "False".

The regression was introduced by d5a6e97abab04282c7a69093cd790b539a958241 when read_progress_bar was switched from self.read_group(...), whose output was pre-formatted the same way the client received it, to self._read_group(...)

Solution
Route read_progress_bar through formatted_read_group, the same method web_read_group uses to build groups for the client. Both sides now run through _web_read_group_groupby_formatter, so the keys are produced by the same code path and match by construction for every field type, including date/datetime granularities.

formatted_read_group wraps relational and date/datetime groupby values as (id, display_name) / (utc_str, label) tuples, so the adapt helper unwraps the first element to restore the scalar key shape the result dict expects.

opw-6148736

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261024

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the *Accounting* module with French localization (*l10n_fr_account*).
* Create a *Sales Tax* with:
  * A new tax group (e.g., 'Codifab').
  * Enable *Affect Base of Subsequent Taxes*.
* Create a *Sales Order*:
  * Add the first tax (with *Affect Base of Subsequent Taxes*).
  * Then add the second tax (eg VAT tax).
* Confirm the *Sales Order*.
* Create a *Down Payment Invoice* (percentage-based).
* Open the generated invoice and:
  * Remove the first tax (the one affecting the base).

**Observed behavior:**
* The amount of the second tax group does not update after removing the first tax, leading to incorrect tax computation.

**Cause:**
* In `_import_base_line_extra_tax_data`, the condition: `all(str(tax.id) in extra_tax_data['manual_tax_amounts'] for tax in sorted_taxes)` only ensured partial matching of taxes.
* This allowed reuse of stale `manual_tax_amounts` when taxes were removed or modified, causing incorrect base values for dependent taxes (e.g., *Affect Base of Subsequent Taxes*).

**Fix:**
* Update the condition to enforce an exact match between current taxes and cached `manual_tax_amounts` by checking both size and membership.
* Prevent reuse of outdated tax data when taxes change, ensuring proper recomputation of dependent taxes.
* Align Python logic with the JS implementation for consistency between `account_tax.py` and `account_tax.js`.

opw-6063970

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259566

Issue:
When creating a payment with an early payment discount, on an invoice using a cash rounding with a strategy of “Modify tax amount”, the early payment discount lines on the payment journal entry will be far off from the correct amount

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a sales tax for 8.1%
2. Create a cash rounding record for 0.05 as the rounding precision, “Modify tax amount” as the rounding strategy, and “Nearest” as the rounding method
3. Create a payment term with early payment discount of 2% if paid within 18 days. And reduced tax on early payment. With a due term of 100% 30 days after the invoice date
4. Create an invoice on 1/1 with a subtotal of 339.60 and the tax of 8.1% and add the cash rounding method and payment term created earlier
5. Create a payment for it 9 days later on 1/10 for the full amount after the early payment discount is applied

Cause:
tax_amounts is grabbing the amount for a certain tax from the last line on the invoice with the same tax_repartition_line_id. Usually there is only one tax line representing a certain tax on an invoice. However, when a cash rounding is applied to the invoice with a strategy of “Modify tax amount”, the cash rounding line that is created will also have the same tax_repartition_line_id. In that case, it will grab the amount on the cash rounding line instead of adding the first tax amount with the cash rounding line amount

Solution:
In tax_amounts, add to the accumulating value if a tax repartition line id already exists as a key otherwise, insert it into tax_amounts

opw-5998497

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259025

- Attendance checkout
    - Step to reproduce: with attendance installed and an employee checked in, archive that employee by HR user. If missing attendance rights, the employee will be archived but not checked out from its ongoing attendance.
    - Cause: if no role set for Attendance (default), no permission to update the employee attendance while archiving.
    - Solution: using sudo method so that any user with sufficient rights to archive an employee, can trigger check out of the corresponding attendance.

- Planning access error (fixed in 18.0 by https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/219395)
    - Step to reproduce: with attendance and planning installed, archive an employee having planning slots. If missing planning rights, an access error is raised
    - Cause: on employee archive, the corresponding planning.slots are updated and some fields recomputed with insufficient rights.
    - Solution: using sudo method for recompute.

Task: 6131692

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264101
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260566

### Contains the following commits:

https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/bb1e6d6aaf [REL] 18.4.40 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/f9016d4abe [FIX] color_picker: prevent gradient from opening when picking a custom color [Task: 6186050](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6186050)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/cd90c39347 [IMP] packages: rolldown is released in 1.0.0 [](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/e8a3b47904 [REL] 18.4.39 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/b4559a2f4c [FIX] packages: update odoo dependencies [](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/909de29b82 [FIX] package: update package-lock [](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/6520e12995 [FIX] package: package install is broken [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/dafe57f32e [REL] 18.4.38 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/dda090e2c9 [FIX] package: husky should run at post install [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/f076750e2e [FIX] workflow: fix the tag definition [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/5a79ef6313 [FIX] Workflow: fix missing permission to use OpenID Connect [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/d2f40770e7 [FIX] workflow: Split the workflow in parallel jobs [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)

Co-authored-by: Florian Damhaut (flda) <flda@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Hendrickx (anhe) <anhe@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexis Lacroix (laa) <laa@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Lefèvre (lul) <lul@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Adrien Minne (adrm) <adrm@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Ronak Mukeshbhai Bharadiya (rmbh) <rmbh@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Dhrutik Patel (dhrp) <dhrp@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Rémi Rahir (rar) <rar@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Pierre Rousseau (pro) <pro@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Vincent Schippefilt (vsc) <vsc@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Marceline Thomas (matho) <matho@odoo.com>

## Issue
When making a request for quotation for a subcontracted product and returning the delivery "for exchange", the new incoming delivery does not have the correct destination. Instead of having the stock of the user, the destination of the new incoming delivery is the same as its source: the subcontracting location.

<img width="1254" height="257" alt="5479900" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c7e6d392-8328-4a03-a71e-466e768f448b" />

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install MRP Subcontracting (`mrp_subcontracting`) and Purchase (`purchase`)
2. In Settings, enable *Subcontracting*
3. Create a Product P and a subcontracting BoM with Subcontractor S
4. Create a Request for Quotation
    - Vendor: Subcontractor S
    - Product: Product P (any quantity > 0)
5. Confirm the RFQ, receive the PO, validate the picking
6. On the validated picking, click *Return*, set the quantity of products to return, and click *Return for Exchange*
    - This creates two new pickings, one to return the product(s) we received, and one to receive new products
7. Validate the two new pickings
8. **In Inventory > Reporting > Moves History, the very last `stock.move.line` has the same location in the *From* (`location_id`) and the *To* (`location_dest_id`) columns**

## Cause
The `location_dest_id` of the new `stock.move` is updated in `StockReturnPickingLine._prepare_move_default_values`.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fb534f1eadcb8ef74e2ee6fd5b68872dddb978e3/addons/mrp_subcontracting/wizard/stock_picking_return.py#L20-L25

The condition added by https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/5404b426aac9 sets the destination of all returned subcontracted moves to the subcontractor location. This is incorrect when using "return for exchange", as in this case, the return move is directed towards the user's stock. In fact, when using "return for exchange", the following pickings are created:

| id | name         | return_id |   |
|:--:|--------------|:---------:|---|
| 1  | WH/IN/00001  |           | Initial RFQ delivery |
| 2  | WH/OUT/00001 |     1     | Return of the initial RFQ delivery |
| 3  | WH/IN/00002  |     2     | New products delivery to replace the initial delivery. The stock.move.line of this stock.picking has a wrong `location_dest_id` |

## Fix
In the context of return for exchanges, the returned item must be directed to the *Subcontracting Location* while the new item must be directed to   the *Stock*. In the `_prepare_move_default_values`, we should only set   the `location_dest_it` to the subcontractor location for outgoing pickings.

opw-5479900

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#245905

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When printing delivery slips, the description of kit components isn't shown. Therefore, we only see the components on the slip, and not the kit they come from.

## Reproduction Steps
1. Go to settings. Under Inventory, in the Operations section, enable Packages.
2. Go to Sales and create a new quotation. Select a customer and add a kit product. Click on confirm.
3. Click on the Delivery smart button. Click on Put in Pack and Validate.
4. Click on the small cog > Print > Delivery Slip.

### Expected behavior
The kit from which the components belong should be indicated somewhere on the slip.

### Unexpected behavior
The kit isn't indicated.

## Origin of the issue
When we print a delivery slip without putting in pack, we can see on the slip that the first line, in bold, corresponds to the kit name. However, after putting in pack, the first line, in bold, indicates the Package id:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/80b602f2fa82366280f9beaa3414c27293bdc4f6/addons/stock/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L116 Thus, the lines after will correspond to the components, of which we retrieve the details with:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/80b602f2fa82366280f9beaa3414c27293bdc4f6/addons/stock/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L125 However, in `_get_aggregated_product_quantities`, we set the description of the components to an empty string under that case: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/80b602f2fa82366280f9beaa3414c27293bdc4f6/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L180-L181 leaving us with no description for the components, and therefore not indicating the kit to which they belong.

__
opw-6006514

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264159
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254200

Steps to reproduce
1. In a French company with Intrastat enabled, set up a product whose commodity code has a CN supplementary unit (e.g. 8802 30 00, "p/st") and set `intrastat_supplementary_unit_amount` on it.
2. Post EU customer invoices for that product.
3. Export the DEBWEB2 XML from the Intrastat report.

Issue
The FR export collapses engine rows a second time in `_group_items`, because the DEBWEB2 format groups more aggressively than the SQL. The aggregator only declares `value` and `weight`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6ae5d3df6e9305416e4d6f74259cd01753025f42/l10n_fr_intrastat/models/account_intrastat_report.py#L308-L313 Items are then rebuilt as `dict(zip(grouping_key, key_tuple)) | grouped_item_values`. `SU_code` survives (it is in the grouping key), but the numeric `supplementary_units` is in neither side and is silently dropped as soon as two engine rows merge. The template then skips the element because of its `t-if="item.get('supplementary_units')"` guard: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6ae5d3df6e9305416e4d6f74259cd01753025f42/l10n_fr_intrastat/data/intrastat_export.xml#L61

opw-6139657

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117033