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

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

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When for an employee with a Flexible schedule, we set a shift overlapping on two days. The attendance report displays twice the worked hours.

## Reproduction Steps
1. Create an employee with a flexible schedule and with Work Entry Source set at Planning.
2. Go to Planning. Create a Planning Slot for this employee from 9 pm to 5 am, then Send and Publish it.
3. Click on the Reporting tab > Planning / Attendance Analysis.

### Expected behavior
The total for this Month for this employee under the Planned Time field should be equal to 8 hours, which is the duration of the planning slot.

### Unexpected behavior
The total for this Month for this employee under the Planned Time field is equal to 16 hours.

## Origin of the issue
This report is a view, for which the SQL is defined starting this line: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7362f1c5be7f496bdab660ed8fad37a6dd283616/planning_attendance/report/planning_attendance_analysis_report.py#L27 the issue stems from here:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7362f1c5be7f496bdab660ed8fad37a6dd283616/planning_attendance/report/planning_attendance_analysis_report.py#L56 where we don't select distinct the planning entries based on their ID. As our shift overlaps 2 days, there will be only one entry for this shift in the `planning_slot`, but because of that, it will be duplicated.

__
opw-6146052

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117128
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115447

Issue before this commit:
=========================
For products tracked by serial/lot with packaging units, the delivery slip correctly shows the packaging unit and quantity before validating the transfer. However, after validating the transfer, the packaging unit and its corresponding quantity are no longer displayed in the delivery slip report.

Steps to Reproduce:
=========================
1. Install stock and sale_management modules.
2. Enable Units of Measure & Packagings and Display Lots & Serial Numbers on Delivery Slips from settings.
3. Create a product with tracking by lot/serial number and configure a packaging unit.
4. Create a SO using this product with a packaging unit and confirm it.
5. Open the related transfer and print the delivery slip before and after validation.

Cause of the Issue:
=========================
The delivery slip report template (stock_report_delivery_has_serial_move_line) does not display packaging unit information after validation for move lines when the packaging unit differs from the product unit of measure.

With This Commit:
=========================
This commit ensures that packaging units and their corresponding quantities are displayed on the delivery slip after validation when the packaging unit differs from the product unit of measure.

Steps To Reporduce: [Video Link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/10DmFKW1Y_Tm-AyKzPrqtFMY8orBkKbIm/view?usp=sharing)

opw-6142052

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264235
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262722

**Problem:**
The "Custom Dates" and "Specific Date" comparison options are missing from the Comparison dropdown in accounting reports.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Go to Accounting > Reporting > Profit & Loss
2. Click the Comparison dropdown
3. Only "No Comparison", "Previous Period", and "Same Period Last Year" are visible — "Custom Dates" is missing

**Current behavior:**
Custom date comparison options are not rendered.

**Expected behavior:**
"Custom Dates" (for range reports) and "Specific Date" (for single date reports) should appear in the Comparison dropdown.

**Cause of the issue:**
The date filter refactor (40484f985f5) restructured how the date mode is stored in options. Previously, `options.date.mode` held 'range' or 'single'. After the refactor, this key no longer exists — the mode is now stored as a boolean in `options.filter_date.range_mode`.

The comparison filter template still checks
`controller.cachedFilterOptions.date.mode`, which is now undefined, so both the range and single conditions always evaluate to false and the custom comparison options are never rendered.

**Fix:**
The comparison template was the only consumer not updated during the refactor. Aligning it to the new data path restores the options without any behavioral change.

opw-6070402

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113391

Issue:
Unreconciling a payment in a batch payment from a recurring invoice will cause an invoice for the next recurring period to be generated

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create and confirm a monthly recurring invoice
2. Create a payment for the invoice
3. Create a batch payment and add the payment created in step 2 then validate it
4. Create a bank statement line and reconcile it with the batch payment created in step 3
5. Unreconcile the payment from the invoice from the invoice form view
6. Notice that a draft invoice for the next month’s recurring invoice is created

Cause:
When unreconciling the payment from the invoice via the invoice form view, the method “delete_reconciled_line” is called. In the “account_accountant_batch_payment” override of that method, it will reset the invoice back to draft and repost it. However, when posting a recurring invoice, the default behavior is to create the invoice for the next recurrence period

Solution:
Adding a new context flag called “skip_recurring_copy” will prevent the next period’s recurring invoice from being generated when invoices are posted through “delete_reconciled_line”

opw-6158881

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263991

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

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

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When we create 2 shifts for the same day for an employee, on a non-working day for their schedule. When trying to create the second one after setting the end date to midnight, we get the error:
`ValueError: Expected singleton: hr.attendance.overtime.line(2, 3)`

## Reproduction Steps
1. Create an Employee. In the Payroll tab, Make sure they have an active contract. Set their Working Hours to a fixed schedule, where they have saturdays as non-working days. In the Settings tab, set an Overtime Ruleset.
2. Click on the overtime ruleset. Then, for each rule, under Action, set the Work Entry Type To Use as Overtime Hours.
3. Go to Attendances. In Configuration > Settings, under Extra Hours, set the Extra Hours Validation as Approved By Manager.
4. Create an attendance for your Employee on a Saturday, from 12h to 18h.
5. Create a second attendance for your Employee on that same Saturday, from 18h to 00h00. Try to Save.
Note: the timezone of your computer, the working schedule and the employee should be set at Brussels time. 

### Expected behavior
The Overtime is registered.

### Unexpected behavior
An error occurs:
`ValueError: Expected singleton: hr.attendance.overtime.line(2, 3)`

## Origin of the issue
The end time of the overtime is defined as follows: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L54-L56 However, in the case where our shift ends after the computed end of the day (in our case, the end time of the shift is 00:00:00 and the end of the day is set at 23:59:59), it creates some problems. The end time of the overtime is set 1 second too early. Later we compute the start time of the overtime as follows: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L57 Thus, the time start of the overtime is also set one second too early. As our second shift starts right after the first one, after the execution of this code, we will get a second shift that starts before the end of the first one.
Then, we add these values in a list:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L59 which will contain overlapping timeframes, and with which we create an Interval:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L60 But when we create an Interval with overlapping timeframes, we obtain only one interval as the timeframes are merged.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L173 As a result, `overtime_intervals` will contain only one time frame with 2 different corresponding overtimes, which causes a singleton error when reaching:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47faff7d6c9da5572e3bad3ff5a55b40c2ba81ac/hr_work_entry_attendance/models/hr_version.py#L179 __
opw-6096454

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117094
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114147

**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#264434
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259566

__
## Short functional explanation of the error
When we set the departure of an employee. The version is retrieved using the dismissal date. However, employees can work after their dismissal date, until their departure (in the case of a notice, for example). Therefore, the departure date should be chosen instead.

## Reproduction Steps
1. Go to Employees and create a new employee. In the Payroll tab, set a start date for their contract. Hit save.
2. This will create a version. You can see it top right, with the contract date. Click on the '+' next to it and set a date later.
3. Click on the cog in the top left and click End of Collaboration. Set an End Reason. Set the Dismissal Date to occur during the first version and the Departure Date to occur during the second version. Then, click Schedule.

### Expected behavior
The Departure tab should appear when clicking on the second version, top right.

### Unexpected behavior
The departure tab appears on the first version.

## Origin of the issue
To select the version on which the departure occurs, we use this line of code:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/be8b1bbad757fda27df579ce36cbc97324f58f62/addons/hr/models/hr_employee_departure.py#L117 `departure_date` should be used instead.

__
opw-6079675

Event tickets show a struck-through original price even when a "Fixed Price" pricelist rule is applied, making it incorrectly appear as a discount. This is inconsistent with eCommerce shop behavior.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Create an event with a paid ticket (e.g., 100 EUR).
2. Create a pricelist with a "Fixed Price" rule for that ticket (e.g., 80 EUR).
3. Open the event registration page.
4. The 100 EUR appears struck-through next to 80 EUR.

### Cause

Odoo's website only shows a struck-through original price for discount rules, not fixed price rules. By design, a fixed price replaces the original rather than reducing it. However, the event registration page used a simplified check: it compared the final price to the original and assumed any difference was a discount. This ignored the rule type, incorrectly flagging fixed price rules as discounts.

### Fix Rationale

A new helper method on the event ticket model now queries the applied pricelist rule to determine if it qualifies as a discount.

opw-5993477

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264470
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263586

**Description of the issue this PR addresses:**
Previously, when a livechat conversation ended, it was never automatically 
marked as read. The existing `mark_as_read` mechanism depends on the 
composer being focused, but ended livechat conversations hides the composer, 
and the chat window does not focus the thread automatically 
(focus only happens on explicit click).

This made it impossible for the read state to be triggered through the normal 
path, leaving agents with persistent unread indicators on closed livechat 
conversations.

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
- Focus the composer when present.
- Focus the conversation otherwise.

This ensures the read state is correctly triggered when the conversation
is effectively in focus.

task-[5900038](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/1519/tasks/5900038)

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263355
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253609

Issue:
Unreconciling a payment in a batch payment from a recurring invoice will cause an invoice for the next recurring period to be generated

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create and confirm a monthly recurring invoice
2. Create a payment for the invoice
3. Create a batch payment and add the payment created in step 2 then validate it
4. Create a bank statement line and reconcile it with the batch payment created in step 3
5. Unreconcile the payment from the invoice from the invoice form view
6. Notice that a draft invoice for the next month’s recurring invoice is created

Cause:
When unreconciling the payment from the invoice via the invoice form view, the method “delete_reconciled_line” is called. In the “account_accountant_batch_payment” override of that method, it will reset the invoice back to draft and repost it. However, when posting a recurring invoice, the default behavior is to create the invoice for the next recurrence period

Solution:
Adding a new context flag called “skip_recurring_copy” will prevent the next period’s recurring invoice from being generated when invoices are posted through “delete_reconciled_line”

opw-6158881

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263991

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

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

When a receipt dest location or delivery source location get archived, the corresponding move may not be taken into account when computing the total_value / avg_cost at date.

OPW-6099192

---

### Test result without fix

```
2026-04-23 06:30:34,016 10516 INFO oes_test_19 odoo.addons.stock_account.tests.test_stockvaluation: Starting TestStockValuation.test_archived_location_valuation ... 
2026-04-23 06:30:34,255 10516 INFO oes_test_19 odoo.addons.stock_account.tests.test_stockvaluation: ====================================================================== 
2026-04-23 06:30:34,255 10516 ERROR oes_test_19 odoo.addons.stock_account.tests.test_stockvaluation: FAIL: TestStockValuation.test_archived_location_valuation
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/Odoo/src/19.0/odoo/addons/stock_account/tests/test_stockvaluation.py", line 3326, in test_archived_location_valuation
    self.assertEqual(self.product_avco.with_context(to_date=date_1).avg_cost, 10)
AssertionError: 20.0 != 10
 ```

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260922

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When we have a subscription product that has already been sold. If we try to import a product with the same ID but where we change the subscription type of the product, the import is executed without issue. However, this leads to undesired behavior:
when we go to the product page and try to manually change the subscription type (set it back to subscription), the change is not applied as a warning is raised.

## Reproduction Steps
Make sure you have debug mode enabled.
1. Create a product, and check the Subscription box.
2. Click on Orders and create a Quotation with this product, then confirm.
3. Go to Products > Products. Select the list view and search for the product you just created. Select it, and click Actions > Export.
4. Check the import compatible field. Select the fields to export: name, id and recurring_invoice. Upon exporting, a file is downloaded.
5. Access that file and change the recurring_invoice to FAUX or FALSE if your computer is in English. Save the changes.
6. Unselect the product and click on the cog, top right > Import. Click on Upload Data File and select the file that you have downloaded upon exporting, then import.

### Expected behavior
A user warning is raised: we shouldn't be able to change the subscription type of the product when it has already been sold.

### Unexpected behavior
The import is processed normally. Then, when we access the product page, and try to check the Subscriptions box again, a warning is raised.

## Origin of the issue
Nothing prevents the import from occurring in that case.

__
opw-6143789

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117111
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115046

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

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

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
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

- 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

### Steps to reproduce:
- Download 'Sales', 'Accounting', and 'l10n_sa_edi' modules
- Settings > Accounting > Rounding Method > Enable global rounding
- Create sale order with 8 lines at 29.7 each with 15% taxes (triggers rounding precision issues)
- Create and confirm 100% downpayment invoice
- Deliver, then create final invoice with downpayment lines
- Call `_l10n_sa_get_prepaid_amount()` on final invoice
> Tax amount was calculated as 35.67 instead of correct 35.64

### Cause of Issue:
The prepaid amount calculation was summing pre-rounded `tax_amount_currency` values from individual downpayment lines (4.45 + 4.46 + 4.46... = 35.67), instead of summing unrounded `raw_tax_amount_currency` values (4.455 × 8 = 35.64) to calculate `tax_amount`. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/27930ae41a5f03bd499983109de7f632472c3650/addons/l10n_sa_edi/models/account_edi_xml_ubl_21_zatca.py#L227-L240

This violates Odoo's [recent change](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/180062) in `round_globally` pattern which states:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8a88756bed194910bc5a47e93f0e29610dbeee1f/addons/account/models/account_tax.py#L2208

### Fix:
Ensure cumulative rounding errors are avoided and correct global rounding is applied.

opw-5881564

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263915
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261278

Pre-requisite:
---------------------------------------
1. Install the Time Off module
2. Create a new company (e.g, Test Company)
3. Create New Timeoff Type: 
    * Ensure a default company is set (e.g, YourCompany)
4. Duplicate the created Time off type: 
    * Remove (Copy) from the name so both records share the same name
    * Clear the Company field on the duplicated record

Steps to reproduce:
---------------------------------------
1. Go to Time Off type which has no Company
2. Allocation Smart button > New
3. Set allocation for some days (e. g, 10 Days) > Approve allocation
4. Now, click on Employee > Time Off smart button
5.  On the Dashboard, you can see allocated leaves
6. Click on any day to create a Time Off Request

Observation:
---------------------------------------
The allocated Time Off Type is not available in the request wizard, even though allocation exists.

Issue:
---------------------------------------
When natively computing allocation statistics for the UI, the `_compute_leaves` loops through a pre-fetched `data_days` structure and incorrectly extracts the calculation metrics by matching the `holiday_status.name` string via a list comprehension lookup index (`item[0]`).
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/73d73c5c6606e0b34c754bfc4de035840951dd3b/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave_type.py#L288-L294

If Time Off Type A and Time Off Type B share the name 'Generic Leave', the list comprehension evaluates sequentially and forcefully maps the dictionary of whichever version structurally sits first in the memory sequence directly onto both overlapping identifiers simultaneously!

Solution:
---------------------------------------
Directly match records using their unique ID.
This ensures that each database record always retrieves its own correct data, preventing any mix-up or accidental sharing of values between records that may have the same name.

opw-6105759

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264104
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261680

__

## 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

**Problem:**
When a project analytic budget is revised, the project update description shows an inflated total budget — the sum of both the original and the revised amounts — instead of reflecting only the active (confirmed) revision.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Create a project with an analytic account
2. Create an analytic budget of $10,000 and confirm it
3. Create a revision of that budget for $15,000 and confirm it
4. Create a new project update
5. The update shows "$25,000" as the total budget instead of "$15,000"

**Current behavior:**
The project update displays the sum of all budget revisions ($25,000), regardless of their state.

**Expected behavior:**
Only the active confirmed budget ($15,000) should be used.

**Cause of the issue:**
`_compute_budget` queries all `budget.line` records matching the project's analytic account without filtering by the parent `budget.analytic` state. When a budget is revised, the original transitions to state `revised` while the new one becomes `confirmed`. Because `_compute_budget` has no state filter, it sums both, producing an inflated `total_budget_amount`. This field is then used in the project update template to compute the displayed budget total and percentage. By contrast, `_get_budget_items` — used for the detail rows — already applies `state in ['confirmed', 'done']`, so the two methods were inconsistent.

**Fix:**
Applying the same state filter to `_compute_budget` as already present in `_get_budget_items` ensures both methods draw from the same set of active budgets, keeping the project update totals consistent with the budget detail rows.

opw-6128855

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115285

This PR introduces a comprehensive revamp of the Frontdesk module
to improve usability, simplify configuration, and remove redundant
features from both frontend and backend.

***Frontend Improvements***
---------------------
- Merged the visitor form and host selection screens into a single
  welcome screen to streamline the check-in process and reduce clicks.
- Removed filters and the create option from the "Host Search" dialog.
- Removed the "Create" button from the company "Search More" dialog.
- Removed Install, Statistics, and Kiosk actions from the station
  kanban card to declutter the UI.

***Model & Field Changes***
---------------------
- Removed the `frontdesk.drink` model along with all related views
  and JavaScript logic.
- Converted `ask_email`, `ask_phone`, and `ask_company` fields from
  boolean to selection fields to support required/optional behavior.
- Simplified visitor state management by removing extra selection
  values and defaulting the state to `checked_in` upon check-in.
- Set the check-in date to use the record creation date.
- When creating a visitor from the backend, automatically assign
  the station if only one station exists; otherwise, leave it empty.

***Configuration & Navigation Cleanup***
-----------------------------------
- Renamed "Options" page to "Settings".
- Moved the hosts field to the Settings page for better organization.
- Renamed "Authenticate Guest" to "Guest Details" for clarity.
- Removed Reporting and Configuration menus.
- Removed "Add/Edit Properties" from the cog menu.
- Added chatter to the station form view for better tracking.

***Notifications***
-------------
- Set default email and SMS templates under Host Notifications.

Overall, these changes modernize the check-in flow, reduce complexity,
and provide a cleaner and more intuitive experience for users and
administrators.

Task-5421138

A traceback occurs when sending an invoice to Peru UBL if a combo product
invoice line does not have any taxes applied.

Steps to reproduce the error:
- Install ``l10n_pe_edi`` module with demo data
- Switch to PE Company
- Create an invoice > Add a Office Combo product > unset the taxes > Confirm
- Process now

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d7f71a68fbd5ff9c7cd52f96e1616671a6b8d77c/l10n_pe_edi/models/account_edi_xml_ubl_pe.py#L549-L552
Here, the ``grouping_key`` becomes ``None`` when no taxes are present on the invoice line.
Normally, invoices without taxes are restricted at [1],
but combo products are excluded from this validation at [2].
As a result, combo product lines without taxes bypass the restriction and trigger a traceback.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d7f71a68fbd5ff9c7cd52f96e1616671a6b8d77c/l10n_pe_edi/models/account_edi_format.py#L928-L929

[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/42b8852df9b323984364c41a13cf27d19fbe04a7/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py#L3433-L3434

sentry-7430552834

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117365
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114798

## Issue
When generating a DMFA report with a working schedule with more or less than 5 days a week, the *Days Per Week* value in the report is still appearing as 5.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Belgium - Payroll* (`l10n_be_hr_payroll`)
2. In Payroll's Settings:
    - set *ONSS Registration Number* to `0830123456`
    - set *DMFA Employer Class* to `083`
    - create a *Work Address DMFA code* (any name, any numeral code, but set the *Working Address* to the Belgian company used for the rest of the steps)
3. In Employees' Settings, set the *Company Working Hours* to a new Working Schedule, with 9 hours/day, 4 days/week. E.g from Monday to Thursday included:
    - Work from 8:00 to 12:00
    - Lunch from 12:00 to 13:00
    - Work from 13:00 to 18:00
4. Create an Employee E for the Belgian company:
    - In the *Payroll* tab, set the start date of the contract to 01/01/2026.
    - In the *Personal* tab, set the *NISS Number* to `85073003328`
5. Create the payslip for January 2026 for the Employee E.
6. In Payroll > Reporting > Belgium > DMFA, create a new DMFA for the first quarter of 2026 and generate the PDF report
7. **In the generated PDF report, the _Days per Week_ line is set to 5.**

## Cause
The number of days was calculated by multiplying `5` with the `work_time_rate` of the related calendar. This is inaccurate in the case of a company where employees are only expected to work 4 days a week.

opw-6103934

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117116
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113804

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When for an employee with a Flexible schedule, we set a shift overlapping on two days. The attendance report displays twice the worked hours.

## Reproduction Steps
1. Create an employee with a flexible schedule and with Work Entry Source set at Planning.
2. Go to Planning. Create a Planning Slot for this employee from 9 pm to 5 am, then Send and Publish it.
3. Click on the Reporting tab > Planning / Attendance Analysis.

### Expected behavior
The total for this Month for this employee under the Planned Time field should be equal to 8 hours, which is the duration of the planning slot.

### Unexpected behavior
The total for this Month for this employee under the Planned Time field is equal to 16 hours.

## Origin of the issue
This report is a view, for which the SQL is defined starting this line: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7362f1c5be7f496bdab660ed8fad37a6dd283616/planning_attendance/report/planning_attendance_analysis_report.py#L27 the issue stems from here:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7362f1c5be7f496bdab660ed8fad37a6dd283616/planning_attendance/report/planning_attendance_analysis_report.py#L56 where we don't select distinct the planning entries based on their ID. As our shift overlaps 2 days, there will be only one entry for this shift in the `planning_slot`, but because of that, it will be duplicated.

__
opw-6146052

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117276
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115447

Steps to reproduce
1. Enable "Batch Account Move Lines" in the Payroll settings.
2. Configure two employees' versions with an analytic distribution on the
   same analytic account but with different percentages (e.g. {acc: 50}
   for the first employee and {acc: 70} for the second).
3. Generate a payslip run containing both employees and validate it.

Issue
The generated account move aggregates the two payslips into a single
line whose analytic_distribution matches only the last employee being
processed; the other employee's percentage is silently lost.

`_get_existing_lines` decides whether an incoming line can merge into an
already accumulated one. When the incoming line has an analytic
distribution, the merge condition delegates to
`_check_partially_matching_accounts`:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/e4a1326c7a8a74da7970aeaa9900c19d01634e31/hr_payroll_account/models/hr_payslip.py#L254-L271
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/e4a1326c7a8a74da7970aeaa9900c19d01634e31/hr_payroll_account/models/hr_payslip.py#L273-L283

That helper returns True as soon as any analytic account of the new
line appears anywhere in the existing line's distribution dict, without
comparing percentages. Two distributions such as {acc: 50} and
{acc: 70} share the same account, so the helper returns True, the
lines are merged, and whichever distribution ends up on the merged line
overwrites the other — the total amount is correct but the analytic
split is wrong.

The logic introduced in commit https://github.com/odoo-dev/enterprise/commit/e40a3166286a6bc546e9543b935233d2a110dc52 successfully addressed merging for rule-level distributions
with composite keys (e.g., {'13,7,12': 40}). However, that implementation is overly inclusive for employee-specific distributions.
It fails to differentiate between cases where the same analytic account is utilized across various employees but with different percentage allocations.
Because it only checks for an account overlap rather than a perfect distributional match, it incorrectly aggregates distinct financial dimensions into a single journal line

Solution
Compare the full analytic_distribution dict by strict equality. Lines
merge only when the distribution is identical (same keys AND same
percentages), keeping the batch feature anonymizing identically
configured employees while preserving one line per distinct
distribution.

opw-6102508

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

### Steps to reproduce:

- Install delivery_envia
- Website > Configuration > eCommerce > Delivery Methods > Envia
- Enable the delivery method, sync the carrier and Publish it
- With a portal user > Shop > Add any product to your cart > Checkout
- Register an address a valid 'Chile' address and confirm say: 
    'street and Number': Avenida Providencia 1432, Depto 402
    'city': Santiago 'zip': 8320000
    'country': Chile  'state': Metropolitana
#### > Envia Error: Invalid Option - String is too long at #->properties:destination

### Cause of the issue:

The problem is caused by the fact that Envia's api expects a 2-3 digits to represent state codes: https://docs.envia.com/reference/state-by-code
The mapping from Odoo's code state representation to envia's one is expected ot be performed by this mapping:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/75cba6d5a88ebc4e0f35040a173ac1c443638daf/delivery_envia/models/envia_request.py#L27-L43 when the address is converted here:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/75cba6d5a88ebc4e0f35040a173ac1c443638daf/delivery_envia/models/envia_request.py#L535-L542 That being said, the `Chile`'s code states of have been changed in [6694a3942c58ff1a56c9e4b36edbe126dd1e66f8](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/6694a3942c58ff1a56c9e4b36edbe126dd1e66f8) to match the official Iso but not in the Envia's mapping leading a failling match keeping the 4 charracter long `CL-RM` of the `Metropolitan` state provided in to the Envia's api as address data.

opw-6210007

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the *Accounting* module.
* Install localisation modules for two different regions:
  * *Belgium* (**l10n_be**)
  * *Luxembourg* (**l10n_lu**)
* Configure two companies, each assigned to one of the above regions.
* Create fiscal positions:
  * In the Belgium company, create a fiscal position for Luxembourg.
  * In the Luxembourg company, create a fiscal position for Belgium.
* Go to *Accounting > Configuration > Settings*. Enable *Inter-Company Transactions*. Enable synchronization of *Vendor Bills and Invoices* for both companies.
* Create an invoice in the Luxembourg company. Select a partner belonging to the Belgium company. Add a product with applicable taxes.

**Observed behavior:**
* A validation error is raised: 'This entry contains taxes that are not compatible with your fiscal position. Please check the country set in the fiscal position and in your tax configuration.'

**Cause:**
* During intercompany bill creation, a foreign fiscal position is applied before recomputing taxes.
* If no mapped foreign taxes exist, the system keeps domestic purchase taxes.
* This leads to a mismatch between taxes and fiscal position, triggering the validation error.

**Fix:**
* Add a safeguard in *_inter_company_create_invoices()*.
* After *_inter_company_sync_invoice_line_taxes()* recomputes taxes, *_inter_company_has_incompatible_fiscal_position_taxes()* checks whether the fiscal position is incompatible.
* If incompatible, the fiscal position is removed and taxes are recomputed without it.

opw-6103671

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116944
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115085

> Commit 1:

[FIX] web_editor: prevent infinite bounce loop when clicking undo

Steps to reproduce:
1. Click an inner snippet without dragging it.
2. Observe that the "Drag building blocks here" section starts bouncing.
3. Drag any snippet and wait for the Undo option to appear.
4. Click Undo, then Redo.

Issue:
- This leads to an infinite bounce loop when using Undo/Redo.

Expected behavior:
- Infinite bouncing should not occur.

This PR prevents unnecessary history steps by disabling history tracking during this phase using `observerUnactive` and `observerActive`. This ensures that the editor does not record redundant changes, preventing infinite bounce loops.


> Commit 2:

[FIX] web_editor: fix dropdown options value

Steps to reproduce:
1. Go to the website and drag and drop the form snippet.
2. Change the action to 'Subscribe to Newsletter'.
3. Click on multi-checkbox field to view its options.

- Even after selecting an option, it remains in the dropdown, allowing multiple selections of the same option.

Expected behaviour:
- Once an option is selected, it should be removed from the dropdown.

Solution:
This PR removes the count from the display name, ensuring correct form behavior.

task-4583314

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#203454

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the *Accounting* module.
* Install localisation modules for two different regions:
  * *Belgium* (**l10n_be**)
  * *Luxembourg* (**l10n_lu**)
* Configure two companies, each assigned to one of the above regions.
* Create fiscal positions:
  * In the Belgium company, create a fiscal position for Luxembourg.
  * In the Luxembourg company, create a fiscal position for Belgium.
* Go to *Accounting > Configuration > Settings*. Enable *Inter-Company Transactions*. Enable synchronization of *Vendor Bills and Invoices* for both companies.
* Create an invoice in the Luxembourg company. Select a partner belonging to the Belgium company. Add a product with applicable taxes.

**Observed behavior:**
* A validation error is raised: 'This entry contains taxes that are not compatible with your fiscal position. Please check the country set in the fiscal position and in your tax configuration.'

**Cause:**
* During intercompany bill creation, a foreign fiscal position is applied before recomputing taxes.
* If no mapped foreign taxes exist, the system keeps domestic purchase taxes.
* This leads to a mismatch between taxes and fiscal position, triggering the validation error.

**Fix:**
* Add a safeguard in *_inter_company_create_invoices()*.
* After *_inter_company_sync_invoice_line_taxes()* recomputes taxes, *_inter_company_has_incompatible_fiscal_position_taxes()* checks whether the fiscal position is incompatible.
* If incompatible, the fiscal position is removed and taxes are recomputed without it.

opw-6103671

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115085

Backport of 7c68c3dbb29eaad4e09d59ef7c86bd525969caec Including its fix: e490c0c66561715853a3f80658f47c940bc453dc

### Issues:

Cancelling the move dest of a manufacturing order does not cancel the MO nor log's an activity warning for the responsible to update the manufacturing demand manually.

Additionally, when selling MTO manufactured products, cancelling the delivery and then changing the sol's demand will update the MO for an incorrect amount.

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings: Enable Multi-Steps Routes
- Inventory > Configuration > Warehouse Management > Routes
- Unarchive the MTO route
- Create an MTO, amnufactured product with BOM
- Create and confirm an SO for 3 units of that product
- Cancel the delivery of 3 units
#### > There is no notification on the unrelevant MO linked to the SO
- Adapt the quantity of the SOL from 3 to 0
#### > The delivery is cancelled but no activity is logged what's so ever

### Expected behavior:

Both of these operations should log an activity as the demand of the MO is not updated on quantity decrease.

opw-6010109
opw-6105366
opw-6100043
opw-6087909

X-original-commit: 796316c341c4346152ad9610c30679f47aaa2ff8

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

## Issue 1:

Backport of 7654c558c4d517807884b0a82323dd160feeda2a

For Colombia, Envia expects the municipality/DANE-style code in the address payload, not the raw postal code.
    
When `l10n_co_edi` was not installed, the Envia integration fell back to the partner zip code and padded it locally before sending it as both `postalCode` and `city`. This produced incorrect values such as turning the Ibagué zip code `730001` into `73000100`, while Envia geocodes resolves that zip code to `73001000`.
    
Use Envia geocodes to resolve the Colombia zip fallback and retrieve the `stat_8digit` code expected by Envia instead of deriving it locally.

## Issue 2:

### Steps to reproduce:

  - Install delivery_envia
  - Website > Configuration > eCommerce > Delivery Methods > Envia
  - Enable the delivery method, sync the carrier and Publish it
  - With a portal user > Shop > Add any product to your cart > Checkout
  - Register an address a valid 'Chile' address and confirm say:
      'street and Number': Avenida Providencia 1432, Depto 402
      'city': Santiago 'zip': 8320000
      'country': Chile 'state': Metropolitana
  > Envia Error: Invalid Option - String is too long at #->properties:destination
  
### Cause of the issue:
  
The problem is caused by the fact that Envia's api expects a 2-3 digits to represent state codes: https://docs.envia.com/reference/state-by-code
The mapping from Odoo's code state representation to envia's one is expected ot be performed by this mapping:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/75cba6d5a88ebc4e0f35040a173ac1c443638daf/delivery_envia/models/envia_request.py#L27-L43
when the address is converted here:
  https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/75cba6d5a88ebc4e0f35040a173ac1c443638daf/delivery_envia/models/envia_request.py#L535-L542
That being said, the `Chile`'s code states of have been changed in 6694a3942c58ff1a56c9e4b36edbe126dd1e66f8 to match the official Iso but not in the Envia's mapping leading a failling match keeping the 4 charracter long `CL-RM` of the `Metropolitan` state provided in to the Envia's api as address data.

opw-6083181
opw-6210007

The delivery transfer for a product tracked by serial number is not linked to the POS order when there is no available stock. When validating a POS delivery in real time, stock can split the transfer into a completed picking and a backorder (e.g. one line fully delivered with lots, another serial-tracked line with no stock and no serial number).

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Setup two products: one tracked by qunatity with some quantity on-hand an other tracked by SN but no quantity on-hand
* Open Pos
* Sell in one order, both products without providing SN
* Validate payment
* Open Inventory: two deliveries sould exist under Inventory Overview of PoS Orders

> Observation:
The first picking shows the POS order as Source Document but the backorder has no source document and is not linked to the POS order.

Why the fix:
------------
Pos Origin (Source Document, POS order, session) was only written on the pickings returned by `_create_picking_from_pos_order_lines`, which did not include pickings created during `_action_done()`. Extend the write to the initial pickings and their backorders so every transfer stays tied to the originating `pos.order`.

opw-6090606

When computing `qty_to_order` 1-3 extra queries are made by `get_lead_days()`, which can cause performance issues when computing `qty_to_order` for a large number of orderpoints.

This commit aims to prevent these extra queries by returning early if the current product is not associated with a bom. The amount this commit speeds up the compute depends on how many of products passed into `_get_lead_days()` are associated with a bom.

`qty_to_order` is no longer a stored field after this commit: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/159432
This benchmark was done in 18.0 on /stock.warehouse.orderpoint/search_panel_select_range. This call does not trigger the compute on all orderpoints in 17.0 as the field is stored but calling the compute directly on all orderpoints results in the same speed up as seen in 18.0.

| Orderpoints | % of products linked to a bom | Time before | Queries before | Time after | Queries After |
|-------------|-------------------------------|-------------|----------------|------------|---------------|
|         800 | 50%                           | 2.8s        |           1570 | 2.3s       |           818 |
|       8,000 | 0%                            | 28.2s       |         16,698 | 15.3s      |           242 |
|       8,000 | 25%                           | 29.6s       |         16,833 | 19.2s      |          4497 |
|       8,000 | 50%                           | 29.8s       |         16,925 | 23.2s      |          8693 |
|       8,000 | 75%                           | 31.6s       |         16,949 | 27.6s      |         12827 |

## **Issue**

When a cash basis tax is configured with a payable/receivable
transition account, tax journal items are generated on that account
without a due date.

Since payable/receivable accounts require a due date on journal
items, this leads to a validation error during move creation:

"Any journal item on a payable account must have a due date and vice versa."

## **Steps to reproduce:**

1. Install the Accounting and Inter-Company modules.
2. Create an additional company so that there are a total of two companies, then switch to Company 1.
3. Create a product with a price and assign a tax to it.
4. Navigate to Accounting → Configuration → Settings and enable Cash Basis accounting.
5. Go to Accounting → Configuration → Taxes and open the purchase tax (or the tax assigned to the product).
6. In the Tax Computation section, ensure that Group of Taxes is not selected.
7. Under the Advanced Options tab, set Tax Exigibility to Based on Payment.
8. Set the Cash Basis Transition Account to a payable account.
9. Open Company Settings, select Company 1, go to the Inter-Company Transactions section, and enable Synchronize invoices/bills.
10. Switch to Company 2 and create an invoice using the same product. Select the contact that is the partner of Company 1.
11. Confirm the invoice.

The following error is raised:

"Any journal item on a payable account must have a due date and vice versa."

## **With This Commit:**
Added a domain on the Cash Basis Transition Account field to prevent
users from selecting payable or receivable accounts, avoiding invalid
configurations and runtime validation errors.

opw-6189615

### Issue before this commit:
In the Italian Annual VAT Report, the balance (base amount) for line VF25 displays incorrect values. Instead of computing the sum of the taxable bases for the passive operations, the report erroneously mixes tax amounts into the balance column.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_it
2. Go to Tax Report and visualize the Annual Tax Report (IT)
3. Go to VF VAT Report
4. See the VF25 is mixing taxes and balances

### Cause of the issue:
The root cause lies in the aggregation_formula definition for the tax_annual_report_line_VF25 record. The formula was incorrectly configured to aggregate the .tax expressions for lines VF1 to VF13 (VF1.tax + VF2.tax + ...) instead of their respective .balance expressions, while correctly using .balance for the remaining lines (VF17 to VF24).
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/878c08cf522a3278b4e6ff5f3d18444989e9998d/addons/l10n_it/data/tax_report/annual_report_sections/vf.xml#L286-L299

It's just a typo in this commit: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/164064/changes/f292ba119d6376dbfb3c1fac4960c9c56a74d938

### Reason to introduce the fix:
From documentation https://www.agenziaentrate.gov.it/portale/documents/20143/9602686/IVA_ANNUALE_2026_istr.pdf/2a42fb92-1b76-229a-d0f5-06069d79b514?t=1768504755711 : 

> Rigo VF25, colonna 1, va indicato il totale degli imponibili determinato sommando gli importi riportati ai righi da VF1 a VF23, colonna 1, diminuito dell’importo di cui al rigo VF24. In colonna 2 va indicato il totale delle imposte determinato sommando gli importi delle colonne 2 dei righi da VF1 a VF13.

opw-6172791

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