Customers placing an order without logging in and with the "Pick up in store" delivery method are not notified when the delivery is confirmed

1. Install eCommerce and Sales
2. Go to Settings > Website > Delivery and enable "Click & Collect"
3. Go to Settings > Inventory > Shipping and enable "Email Confirmation"
4. Go to Website > Configuration > Payment Providers and Install Demo
5. Go to Website > Configuration > Delivery Methods and open "Pick up in store", set YourCompany as warehouse and publish it
6. Go to Sales > Products, open product "Office Lamp", click on "Update Quantity" in the status bar and add 5 units
7. Log out
8. Go to the shop, add product "Office Lamp" to the cart and checkout
9. Fill in the address form and continue checkout
10. Select "Pick up in store" as delivery method and select a location
11. Confirm the order and pay with Demo
12. As user Mitchell Admin, go to Sales, remove the default filter and open the newly created sale order
13. Open the related delivery with the smart button and validate it
14. No delivery order confirmation was sent to the customer (check emails)

Issue:
Confirming an order with a "Pick up in store" delivery method replaces the `partner_shipping_id` of the sale order with an archived partner
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/delivery/models/sale_order.py#L178-L192
which updates the `partner_id` of the related `stock.picking` with the archived partner
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order.py#L130-L132
This will unsubscribe the old `partner_id` on the `stock.picking` and try to subscribe the archived partner
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/stock/models/stock_picking.py#L1120-L1125
Because the partner we want to subscribe is archived, he will be filtered out and the subscribe action will have no effect, preventing him from receiving the delivery confirmation
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py#L4367-L4369

Solution:
Subscribe the parent of the archived partner when we write a `partner_id` on pickings with "in_store" `delivery_type`. This ensures the unarchived partner is subscribed to the picking allowing him to receive the mail confirmation.

opw-6095396

Before this commit, for DBs with a very large number of products it was possible for the thread to run out of memory when importing an invoice or a bill.
The reason is that the name on product.product is non stored and computed. This leads to tons of recomputes, which in turn leads to reads and stores in cache of the underlying `product.product`, which down the line uses up all of the available memory for the thread.

The proposed method uses batches instead of a `search_fetch` as the latter would not solve the recompute problem and hence the underlying memory problem.
Another alternative approach could be going straight for the `product.template.name`, but that approach might introduce a loss of precision or functionality when searching for products at invoice import.

Here is the memory graph from memray before the fix:
<img width="1106" height="450" alt="opw-6168737-memray-pre-fix" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f971dc4d-aa09-41e3-a8c5-e5ca53f9786d" />

And here is the same graph after the fix:
<img width="1106" height="450" alt="opw-6168737-memray-post-fix" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a784cdc-9b40-498b-bbcb-89114eec1ec9" />

We can see a much lower peak memory usage after the fix. We an also observe that the memory complexity shifts from `O(n)` to `O(1)`, with `n` being the number of `product.product` records stored in the DB.

For both presented graphs, the same, unaltered database was tested. The database contains 389 467 `product.product` records.

opw-6168737

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262591

Steps to produce:
---
- Install website_sale module.
- Enable `Comparison Price` from settings.
- Create a product with sales price = 25 and compare price = 25.
- Go to the shop page and search for the product.

Issue:
---
- The strikethrough appears on the compare price (25) even when the compare price equals the sales price.
- The strikethrough should only appear when the compare price is strictly greater than the sales price.

Root cause:
---
- In `_search_render_results_prices` [1], the condition only checks for the presence of `compare_list_price` in `combination_info`, without verifying that it is actually greater than the sales price. This causes the strikethrough to render even when both prices are equal.

Solution:
---
- Added a strict greater-than check on compare price against the sales price, aligning with the existing behavior already implemented for the product page [2].

Before:
---
<img width="537" height="98" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a1524f0f-4a59-4daf-ac7d-834604710492" />

After:
---
<img width="538" height="95" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1e32269b-13c0-469b-9d1f-e6d6ced97fdd" />


[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4ca059731f97d0f9bce4863cf195fd68a755717e/addons/website_sale/models/product_template.py#L831-L834
[2]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4ca059731f97d0f9bce4863cf195fd68a755717e/addons/website_sale/views/templates.xml#L1340-L1346

opw-6178129
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262434

Steps to reproduce
1. Create a Combo Product with some combo items.
2. Open Odoo on a mobile device or simulate mobile view (isSmall=true).
3. Create a new Quotation and add the Combo Product via the "Add product"
   button in the order lines kanban.

Issue
The combo product is added directly to the order lines with a price of
0.00, and the Combo Configurator dialog never opens.

On mobile, the 'product_id' field in the 'sale.order.line' inline form
view uses the generic 'many2one_barcode' widget. This widget is a
standard Many2one with barcode support but lacks the specific logic in
'SaleOrderLineProductField'
(https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d1ab74aebc356537dd2a7df43fb40150580802ea/addons/sale/static/src/js/sale_product_field.js#L74-L92)
that detects combo/configurable products and opens the appropriate
configurator dialog. On desktop, the 'sol_product_many2one' widget
handles this, but it was not used on mobile because it lacks barcode
scanning features.

Solution
The inline form view now uses 'sol_product_many2one' with
options="{'can_scan_barcode': True}" instead of 'many2one_barcode'.
This leverages the existing 'can_scan_barcode' option on Many2OneField
(https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7ba46d2cea7f522e17ffe04c4051469fb0320a76/addons/web/static/src/views/fields/many2one/many2one_field.js#L390),
giving the field both configurator logic and barcode support. The fields
needed for combo state ('selected_combo_items', 'virtual_id') are also
added to the mobile views.

opw-6062731

Before this commit, there was no way to tell the ColorPicker to not use the DEFAULT_THEME_COLOR_VARS (ie classes of the form o-color-[n] with n some integer)

Those colors are a bit special (see full discussion on the opw)

    Their existence is described in module web
    Their CSS definition is implemented in module html_editor
    Reports don't use them at all We probably don't want reports' style
    to be influenced by the presence or lack thereof of the html_editor
    module, which was originally made to customize the interface.

Those architecture issues should be solved downstream in master, but they are practically endemic in Odoo.

This commit addresses the fact that Studio's report editor should not allow those colors as possible customization by offering the components and plugins in the chain a props to disable them.

After this commit (and more broadly the PR bundle), the default theme colors are not available in studio's report editor.

see odoo/odoo#251446
backport of https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/109206
opw-6167143


community: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/264917

## **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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263792

Currently, an incorrect VAT format is used in the generated `FA3 XML`
for non-Polish partners, where the VAT number includes the country code.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_pl_edi` module and switch to a `PL Company`.
- Go to Settings and enable `Allow KSeF integration` (refer to [1]).
- Create and confirm an invoice for a customer (e.g., Azure Interior).
- Send the invoice using `by KSeF (e-Faktura)`.

**Observation:**
In the generated XML file, the `NrID` field contains the VAT number 
`with the country code` for non-Polish partners.

**Root Cause:**
At [2], `get_vat_number` sets the VAT number using `compact` from 
`stdnum.pl.nip`, which only works for Polish VAT numbers.

At [3], `get_vat_number` correctly formats Polish VAT numbers without 
the country code in the `if condition`. However, in the fallback (else) case, 
it returns the VAT number as it is, including the country code.

**Fix:**
This commit ensures that for non-Polish VAT numbers, the country code is 
removed before setting the `NrID` or `NrVatUE` values in the XML, 
aligning the format with KSeF requirements.

Ref: https://ksef.podatki.gov.pl/media/4u1bmhx4/information-sheet-on-the-fa-3-logical-structure.pdf (Page no.: 19)

[1]:
https://www.odoo.com/mail/message/1057847327

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/l10n_pl_edi/models/account_move.py#L257

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/l10n_pl_edi/data/fa3_template.xml#L67-L82

opw-6120118

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264379

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable dropshipping
- Create a storable product P, enable the dropshipping and set a vendor
- Create and confirm a sale order for a field service
- Open the related task > Products > Add 1 unit of P
- Go back to the sale order > an RFQ has been created
#### > The delivered quantity of P is set to 1

### Cause of the issue:

Since 2361368acfe7fecbffde2ca26392eb89aecdc9e1 the `_inverse_fsm_quantity` method manually adapts the delivered quantity based on the fact that the `product.service_type` is `manual` rather than the `qty_delivered_method` of the line or future line is. In particular, because these lines: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8f4fe902cb71c49bdb3caf9915f9a5abfe6f237f/industry_fsm_sale/models/product_product.py#L82-L83
provide a value of the `qty_delivered` to the created purchase order line and since the `qty_delivered_method` is a precomputed field: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fdfd9851393ff82a265997478886bcad6da357d0/addons/sale/models/sale_order_line.py#L225-L237
The fact that the purchase order line will be created with a `stock_move` `qty_delivered_method` and that the generated PO does not generate any move prior to confirmation will not trigger the dependency of the `qty_delivered` to retrigger a computation of the `delivered_qty` of the product which is suppose to be based on stock pickings: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fdfd9851393ff82a265997478886bcad6da357d0/addons/sale/models/sale_order_line.py#L871-L876 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fdfd9851393ff82a265997478886bcad6da357d0/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L193-L198
Leaving the created sol with a delivered quantity of 1 prior to confirmation of the PO (which will generate move_ids related to the sol and trigger the compute).

Fix:

The changes of 2361368acfe7fecbffde2ca26392eb89aecdc9e1 regarding the `_inverse_fsm_quantity` appears unjustified with respect to the purpose of the fix. In addition, the `qty_delivered` and changes are already expected to be properly computed when the `qty_delivered_method` is not manual, particularly since the '`manual'` `service_type` is actually the default `service_type` corresponding to any 'consu' product and looks unrelated by any mean to the `delivered_qty` computation: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fdfd9851393ff82a265997478886bcad6da357d0/addons/sale/models/product_template.py#L165-L167

opw-6104326