Issue:
----------------------------------------
In the Planning Gantt view when we don't group by resources, the total row is not considering the working hours.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Open Planning
- Remove the default group by resources
- Have at least a planning slot for a non-flexible employee
- The total row doesn't take the working schedule into account

Cause:
----------------------------------------
Since [an improvement,](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/cc35e1a4729453e4f788034a94402ab048eadfcb) the working hours data in given to the `PlanningGanttRenderer` through the progress bars data. This is an issue because the progress bars are only there if we group by resources. ([src](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/423ab064847dd41d36778a812390e3bec53ba4dc/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L2669-L2678))

Solution:
----------------------------------------
In this commit we partially revert the commit adding the working intervals in the progress bars. Instead of doing it in `_gantt_progress_bar_resource_id()` we create a new method `_get_gantt_planning_data()` which is called directly in `get_gantt_data()` and returns useful information even when there are no progress bars.

opw-5507063

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116914
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112522

### Steps to reproduce:

**Issue 1:**
- Create a list with multiple items and leave the last item empty.
- Press Ctrl + A to select all content.
- Apply a text color from the toolbar.
- The list marker of the last item does not receive the color.

**Issue 2:**
- Create a list and type some text.
- Press Ctrl+A to select all.
- Apply a font size via the font-size input (inline style=`font-size: ...`).
- Then apply a font size via the font-size dropdown (class-based).
- Font size from the dropdown is not applied.

**Issue 3:**
- Create a list item and type some text.
- Convert the text into a link.
- Copy the link.
- Press Enter and paste the link.
- Select the entire list using the mouse.
- Apply font size & observe that font size is not applied to some list items.

**Issue 4:**
- Go to Todo and create a list.
- Select all items (Ctrl + A).
- Apply a background color class from the toolbar.
- Apply a font color using inline styling.
- Observe that the font color is not visible.

### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

- Full-selection detection relied on Range.isPointInRange() checks on list item leaf nodes. When a list item ended with a trailing empty line, the selection often stopped on the `<li>` element and did not include the `<br>` placeholder. As a result, such list items were not considered fully selected when applying text color, and their markers remained unstyled.
- Applying a font-size class on a fully-selected list item could leave existing inline font-size on list item, so new class didn’t take effect.
- Creating links inside list items & repeated copy-paste operations left empty text nodes (feff cleanup). Manual selection doesn't include these nodes, `areNodeContentsFullySelected` reports that list item is not fully selected. As a result, some list items were not considered fully selected, and font size was not applied.
- Background color `(bg-*)` classes also define a color property. When a font color is applied, the color is set on the `<li>`, but the nested `font.bg-*` element’s color takes precedence, causing the applied font color to be overridden.

### Desired behavior after PR is merged:

- List items with trailing empty line are now treated as fully selected, even when selection ends before the `<br>` placeholder.
- Clear any existing font-size styles on the list item before applying the new font-size class, so the dropdown font size applies correctly.
- Empty text nodes are removed before applying font size, ensuring full list item selection and consistent font-size application.
- When a list item (li) has a text color (inline style or text-* class), and nested font element has only a background color class then font element now inherits the color from the li.

task - 5454639

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264759
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#241827

- 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#264518
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260566

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Start a new meeting (Host Tab).
- Duplicate the tab or open the same meeting URL in another tab (remote tab).
- In the remote tab, open the call menu (dropdown).
- From the host tab, disconnect/end the call.
- Crashes on Remote Tab.

**Current behavior before PR:**
Before this PR, duplicating a meeting tab could leave the remote tab 
with a stale call action dropdown after the host ended the call. Since 
some action properties and handlers still assumed that selfSession 
and channel were always available, interacting with the dropdown could 
crash with errors.

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
After this PR, call action labels/classes defensively tolerate 
missing selfSession or channel references, and stale click handlers 
gracefully no-op when the call disappears mid-interaction. This prevents
remote tab crashes during call teardown while preserving the existing UI 
behavior.

task-[6191740](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/1519/tasks/6191740)

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264989

**Problem:**
When opening a PDF attachment preview in v19+, the print button disappeared. As a result, the Print button is not accessible from the main toolbar.

In v18 the buttons remained permanently visible.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Open any record that has a PDF attachment in the chatter.
- Click the PDF attachment to open the preview popup.
- Observe toolbar buttons disappeared.

**Cause:**
commit responsible for this: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/b7889d007f72c7e7f9f22318a9968338cde0ddb3 It was removed to prevent some bugs with some android/smartdevice and some old browsers

`file_viewer.js` passes `hidePrint: true` to `hidePDFJSButtons()`. This was originally added alongside the mobile guard (`isMobileOS()`), but the `isMobileOS()` guard in `hidePDFJSButtons` already handles mobile, so the explicit `hidePrint: true` in `file_viewer.js` was redundantly hiding Print on desktop too. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/file_viewer/file_viewer.js#L60-L71 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/utils/pdfjs.js#L35-L37

**Fix:**
- Remove `hidePrint: true` from `file_viewer.js` since mobile is already covered by the `isMobileOS()` check inside `hidePDFJSButtons()`.

opw-6216534

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264739

Currently, a CSS rule forces the form container width to 1px to ensure that the nested list view can correctly compute its size.

See:

```scss
.o_form_view.o_xxl_form_view {
    .o_form_view_container {
        width: 1px; /* List view needs a width value to recompute the size correctly */
    }
}
```

However, since the Knowledge editor is implemented as a form view, this rule also affects Knowledge. When zooming out, the `o_xxl_form_view` class is added to the form view container, causing the rule to apply. If an article is printed while this class is present, it is constrained to an extremely narrow column, making it unreadable.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open an article in Knowledge
2. Zoom out using `Ctrl` + `-`
3. Open the kebab menu and select "Export"

=> The article is rendered in a very narrow column.

To address this issue, we override this rule specifically for Knowledge. With this change, articles are now rendered correctly when printed or exported as PDF.

Task-5999878

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103259

When an attachment has neither `store_fname` nor `db_datas`, the computed `raw` field was being assigned `False`.

This caused crashes in flows expecting binary content, where `binary_to_image()` ultimately passes the value to `io.BytesIO()`, which requires bytes-like data.

Traceback:
```python
Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "/tmp/tmpufuj48vj/migrations/base/tests/test_mock_crawl.py", line 344,
 in crawl_menu self.mock_action(action_vals)
   File "/tmp/tmpufuj48vj/migrations/base/tests/test_mock_crawl.py", line 357,
 in mock_action return self.mock_act_window(action)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/tmp/tmpufuj48vj/migrations/base/tests/test_mock_crawl.py", line 517,
 in mock_act_window mock_method(model, view, fields_list, domain, group_by)
   File "/tmp/tmpufuj48vj/migrations/base/tests/test_mock_crawl.py", line 550,
 in mock_view_form [data] = record.read(fields_list)
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/models.py", line 2734, in read
    self._origin.fetch(fields)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/models.py", line 3065, in fetch
    fetched.mapped(field_name)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5477, in mapped
    return [getter(record) for record in records]
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1793, in
 __get__ self.compute_value(recs)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1964,
 in compute_value records._compute_field_value(self)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py",
 line 495, in _compute_field_value return super()._compute_field_value(field)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/models.py", line 4269,
 in _compute_field_value determine(field.compute, self)
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 82,
 in determine return needle(*args)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/social_instagram/models/
social_post_template.py", line 57, in _compute_instagram_preview
    faulty_images, error_code = post._get_instagram_image_error()
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/social_instagram/models/
social_post_template.py", line 108, in _get_instagram_image_error
    image = binary_to_image(jpeg_image.with_context(bin_size=False).raw)
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/tools/image.py", line 428,
 in binary_to_image return Image.open(io.BytesIO(source))
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 TypeError: a bytes-like object is required, not 'bool'
```
To prevent this, fallback to an empty bytes object (`b''`) when `db_datas` is falsy during `_compute_raw`.

[here]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/saas-19.2/social_instagram/models/social_post_template.py#L108

upg-4247928
opw-6181262

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

***Steps to reproduce*:**

- Install `l10n_co_reports` module.
- Create 2 vendor bills with taxes `0% EXEMPT` and `0.966% RteICA`.
- Navigate to Reports -> Colombian Statements -> Certificado de Retención en ICA
- Generate the PDF report.

***Observed behavior*:**

- An error is raised while generating the PDF: 
`AttributeError: 'AccountReportColumnData' object has no attribute 'get'`

***Cause*:**

After commit [1](https://github.com/odoo-dev/enterprise/commit/b92dc397bef029472a40223f51b611cdf5b631dc#diff-e97f74c63a6257470e69eb8122c12d0ce4afa5bc6013176bb69e702849575123) all report lines, columns, and annotations were converted
from dictionaries to custom objects (e.g., AccountReportColumnData). However,
the function `_get_report_values` still uses .get() to access values, which is only valid 
for dictionaries. Calling .get() on these objects raises an error.

***Fix*:**

- Replace the `get()` method usage with `column.name` format to access 
  values from `AccountReportColumnData ' properly.
- This ensures compatibility with the new structured column data format introduced in v19.2.

opw-6205984

When scraping the component of a MO created by another user you could get an access error saying you don't have write access on account analytic lines.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Install timesheet_grid and project_mrp_account
* Create product A, storable
* Create product B with a cost of 20 and also storable
* Update the available quantity of product B
* Create a BoM for product A, it should only require one product B
* Update Marc Demo access right and make sure he doesn't have access to any accounting stuff and he has atleast timesheet approver
* Create a first MO for 1 product A and produce it
* Create a second MO for 1 prodcuct A but just confirm it
* Login as Marc Demo and try to scrap the component of the second MO
> Observation: You get an access error here https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d98afdc08b46bf458eaa287ea882cc7663286a59/addons/stock_account/models/analytic_account.py#L95

opw-5954989

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262104
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#255824

Currently an exception is generated when the user tries to save the report XML as follows:

- Install sale_management and web_studio
- Go to Sales > Enable Studio Mode > Open Reports
- Click New > Select `Blank` Report
- Click `EDIT RESOURCES` and replace all XML with below (Remove `lock-id`)
```
<t t-name="web.basic_layout">
        <t t-call="web.html_container">
            <t t-if="not o" t-set="o" t-value="doc"/>
            <div class="article" t-att-data-oe-model="o and o._name" t-att-data-oe-id="o and o.id" t-att-data-oe-lang="o and o.env.context.get('lang')">
                <!-- Your report content -->
            </div>
        </t>
    </t>
```

Error: `KeyError: None`

This issue arises because users removed `lock-id` (identified nodes) attributes from elements, making them untraceable. As a result, fetching the `DIFF_ATTRIBUTE` (key for getting identified) nodes from the modified XML (new_tree) returns `None`, which causes an error when attempting to access the corresponding node in `map_id_to_node_old` (see see code at [1]).

This commit fixes the issue by preventing access to `map_id_to_node_old` when the `key (new_tree.get(DIFF_ATTRIBUTE))` is `None`. In this case, no changes are applied, and the original XML is returned since no identifiable attribute is available in new XML tree.

sentry-7349653271

- 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#264518
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260566

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Start a new meeting (Host Tab).
- Duplicate the tab or open the same meeting URL in another tab (remote tab).
- In the remote tab, open the call menu (dropdown).
- From the host tab, disconnect/end the call.
- Crashes on Remote Tab.

**Current behavior before PR:**
Before this PR, duplicating a meeting tab could leave the remote tab 
with a stale call action dropdown after the host ended the call. Since 
some action properties and handlers still assumed that selfSession 
and channel were always available, interacting with the dropdown could 
crash with errors.

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
After this PR, call action labels/classes defensively tolerate 
missing selfSession or channel references, and stale click handlers 
gracefully no-op when the call disappears mid-interaction. This prevents
remote tab crashes during call teardown while preserving the existing UI 
behavior.

task-[6191740](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/1519/tasks/6191740)

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264989

**Problem:**
When opening a PDF attachment preview in v19+, the print button disappeared. As a result, the Print button is not accessible from the main toolbar.

In v18 the buttons remained permanently visible.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Open any record that has a PDF attachment in the chatter.
- Click the PDF attachment to open the preview popup.
- Observe toolbar buttons disappeared.

**Cause:**
commit responsible for this: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/b7889d007f72c7e7f9f22318a9968338cde0ddb3 It was removed to prevent some bugs with some android/smartdevice and some old browsers

`file_viewer.js` passes `hidePrint: true` to `hidePDFJSButtons()`. This was originally added alongside the mobile guard (`isMobileOS()`), but the `isMobileOS()` guard in `hidePDFJSButtons` already handles mobile, so the explicit `hidePrint: true` in `file_viewer.js` was redundantly hiding Print on desktop too. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/file_viewer/file_viewer.js#L60-L71 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/utils/pdfjs.js#L35-L37

**Fix:**
- Remove `hidePrint: true` from `file_viewer.js` since mobile is already covered by the `isMobileOS()` check inside `hidePDFJSButtons()`.

opw-6216534

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264739

**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

Currently an error occurs when the user unlinks all websites and tries
to access the frontend ( website).

Steps to produce an error:
- Install the website module
- Delete external identifier default_website
- Delete the My Website from Website > Configuration > Websites
- An error will occur when we try to access the website.

Error: `TypeError: expected string or bytes-like object, got 'bool'`

This issue was generated because while setting cookies to the Werkzeug
response, we got 'value' as a `False` at line [1], and the `value` is the
language code from the request (see line [2]) .

The language is determined by the `IrHttp` class through the `_get_default_lang`
method (see code line [3]). In the website module, this method is overridden
to return the language configured on the current website.

However, when all websites are deleted, no valid website record remains.
As a result, the method attempts to retrieve the language from an empty website,
which returns `False` (see code line [4]), leading to the issue.

This commit fixes the issue by preventing the deletion of all website records.

The method `_unlink_except_default_website` already ensures that the
default website (identified by the external ID `website.default_website`)
cannot be deleted. However, if this external identifier has been removed,
the safeguard no longer applies, allowing the default website to be deleted
without raising any error.

To address this, an additional check has been introduced: when the
`default_website` is not found, the system verifies whether any website records
remain using search_count. If no records are found, a `UserError` is raised to
prevent the deletion and ensure that at least one website always exists.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cdf8aaec82ee387c8f29b8327efbc95fd17e2cb8/odoo/http.py#L1825
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cdf8aaec82ee387c8f29b8327efbc95fd17e2cb8/addons/http_routing/models/ir_http.py#L518
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cdf8aaec82ee387c8f29b8327efbc95fd17e2cb8/addons/http_routing/models/ir_http.py#L407-L411
[4]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cdf8aaec82ee387c8f29b8327efbc95fd17e2cb8/addons/website/models/ir_http.py#L288

sentry-7413005338

- 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#264518
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260566

## **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#264777
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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263081

**Problem:**
When opening a PDF attachment preview in v19+, the print button disappeared. As a result, the Print button is not accessible from the main toolbar.

In v18 the buttons remained permanently visible.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Open any record that has a PDF attachment in the chatter.
- Click the PDF attachment to open the preview popup.
- Observe toolbar buttons disappeared.

**Cause:**
commit responsible for this: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/b7889d007f72c7e7f9f22318a9968338cde0ddb3 It was removed to prevent some bugs with some android/smartdevice and some old browsers

`file_viewer.js` passes `hidePrint: true` to `hidePDFJSButtons()`. This was originally added alongside the mobile guard (`isMobileOS()`), but the `isMobileOS()` guard in `hidePDFJSButtons` already handles mobile, so the explicit `hidePrint: true` in `file_viewer.js` was redundantly hiding Print on desktop too. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/file_viewer/file_viewer.js#L60-L71 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/654a1caafc2ab7b2841c372910b2e81dc6e9c035/addons/web/static/src/core/utils/pdfjs.js#L35-L37

**Fix:**
- Remove `hidePrint: true` from `file_viewer.js` since mobile is already covered by the `isMobileOS()` check inside `hidePDFJSButtons()`.

opw-6216534

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264739

**Steps to reproduce in runbot:**
1. Install hr_holidays_attendance.
2. Create an employee with a contract start date (e.g., April 1st).
3. Set the timezone(for both user and emp working schedule) to Europe/Brussels.
4. Create an attendance record (e.g., April 15th).
5. Go to Reporting > Time Off Ledger and remove all filters.
 -> Attendance is correctly shown for all dates from April 1st
6. Create a public holiday on April 16th starting at 00:00.
7. Check the Time Off Ledger again.

**Issue:**
The attendance entry for April 15th disappears after adding the public holiday.

**Cause:**
Calendar leave datetime fields (date_from/date_to) are stored in UTC but compared against attendance dates without converting to the employee's resource calendar timezone, causing date boundaries to shift and records to be incorrectly excluded.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b293ce50e0fc9355ffd233557f079916b514eac7/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/report/hr_leave_attendance_report.py#L133-L144

**Solution:**
Convert calendar leave datetimes to the resource calendar timezone before casting to date, ensuring comparisons reflect the correct local boundaries.

**NOTE:**
This issue is mainly reproducible on runbot since its server timezone is
GMT. On local machines configured with UTC, the stored datetime values
already align with the expected conversions, so the date shift does not occur.


opw-6118043




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262179

Steps to reproduce:-
- Navigate to Time off Dashboard calendar view.
- Create a leave. First approve it then refuse it.
- Now on the same day create a leave and approve it.
- Now re-approve the previously refused leave from step 2.
- System will let user to create 2 leave of same types on same day!

Cause:-
In `_compute_dashboard_warning_message`, refused/cancelled leaves were
excluded from warning computation. When approving a refused request,
the warning message was not set, allowing the constraint check to pass
even when conflicting approved requests existed for the same period.

Fix:-
1. Refactored `_compute_dashboard_warning_message` to only compute
   warnings for active leaves (non-refused/cancelled) while still
   detecting conflicts with already approved requests
2. Updated `_check_date` constraint to skip validation for refused/
   cancelled leaves, but enforce it when state changes to validate
3. Added 'state' to constraint triggers to ensure validation runs
   when approving previously refused requests

task-[6181717](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/1251/tasks/6181717)
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262703

__
## Short functional explanation of the error
When setting attendances on several consecutive days for a flexible employee, with an overtime ruleset containing a single rule. This rule being based on week and quantity.
When regenerating overtimes for this ruleset, the overtime hours generated isn't correct.

## Reproduction Steps
1. Create an employee. In the Payroll tab, set a start date for their contract. Set Work Entry Source as Attendances. Set their Working Hours as a flexible schedule. Set their weekly hours at 40.
2. Create an Overtime Ruleset. Add a single rule, based on Quantity, if the worked hours on a `Week` differs `from the amount defined on the contract`. Check Pay Extra Hours and leave the Work Entry Type to use as Overtime Hours.
3. Go back to the employee. In Settings, set the Overtime Ruleset field as the new Overtime Ruleset you just created.
4. Create 5 attendances, each from 8 am to 6 pm, from Monday to Friday.
5. Go to the Overtime Ruleset you just created and click on Regenerate Overtimes.
6. Go back to Attendances. Search for your employee, and click on the list view.

### Expected behavior
The employee's schedule is 40 hours per week. They worked 50 hours. 10 hours should be considered as Worked Extra Hours.

### Unexpected behavior
18 hours are considered as extra hours.

## Origin of the issue
To compute the expected duration of the day, we run: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7fc5edc29f854d619dbcb5fcc3503fb18ca05335/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance_overtime_rule.py#L303-L304 where `schedule['work']` will contain intervals on 5 consecutive days, from 8 am to 4 pm.
However, the last day of the employee's attendances isn't contained in these intervals. As a result, `period_schedule` will contain 4 days (the common days between the employee's Attendance days and `schedule['work']` ) and thus, `expected_duration` will be set at 36 hours instead of 40.
In the case where overtimes are computed based on hours from the 
contract, for flexible employees, the expected hours are the ones
indicated on their schedule.

__
opw-6131543

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263335

**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

**Steps to reproduce**
1. Create a company with a branch.
2. Create account journals for both the parent and branch companies.
3. Create an employee in the branch company and assign a salary structure to the employee. Also, make sure the employee’s contract is started.
4. Create a pay run for this employee while staying in the parent company.
5. Generate and validate the payslip.
6. Check that the `move_id` (draft journal entry) is created for the employee’s company, not the currently selected company.

**Issue:**
When an employee belongs to a branch company and we create a pay-run/payslip for that employee, the draft journal entry is created using the default company.

**Fix:**
Since `journal_id` is a company-dependent field, we will use `slip.struct_id.with_company(slip.company_id).journal_id`. This ensures that we will pass correct slip's `journal_id` to `_create_account_move()`.

After that `_compute_company_id()` in `account_move.py` will be executed, and the `move_id` will have the correct `company_id`. Ref [code](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1839e68cad91f6b16865f6ac365500ab6fbda835/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L889-L896)
Hence, the issue will be fixed.

task: 6123216

Currently, a CSS rule forces the form container width to 1px to ensure that the nested list view can correctly compute its size.

See:

```scss
.o_form_view.o_xxl_form_view {
    .o_form_view_container {
        width: 1px; /* List view needs a width value to recompute the size correctly */
    }
}
```

However, since the Knowledge editor is implemented as a form view, this rule also affects Knowledge. When zooming out, the `o_xxl_form_view` class is added to the form view container, causing the rule to apply. If an article is printed while this class is present, it is constrained to an extremely narrow column, making it unreadable.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open an article in Knowledge
2. Zoom out using `Ctrl` + `-`
3. Open the kebab menu and select "Export"

=> The article is rendered in a very narrow column.

To address this issue, we override this rule specifically for Knowledge. With this change, articles are now rendered correctly when printed or exported as PDF.

Task-5999878

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103259

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263081

**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

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264732
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#258093

Currently, a CSS rule forces the form container width to 1px to ensure that the nested list view can correctly compute its size.

See:

```scss
.o_form_view.o_xxl_form_view {
    .o_form_view_container {
        width: 1px; /* List view needs a width value to recompute the size correctly */
    }
}
```

However, since the Knowledge editor is implemented as a form view, this rule also affects Knowledge. When zooming out, the `o_xxl_form_view` class is added to the form view container, causing the rule to apply. If an article is printed while this class is present, it is constrained to an extremely narrow column, making it unreadable.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open an article in Knowledge
2. Zoom out using `Ctrl` + `-`
3. Open the kebab menu and select "Export"

=> The article is rendered in a very narrow column.

To address this issue, we override this rule specifically for Knowledge. With this change, articles are now rendered correctly when printed or exported as PDF.

Task-5999878

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103259

**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

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115760

__

## 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#117247
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114147

**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#117099
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113391

Issue
-----
When there are 2 lines for a single product and different packaging uoms, scanning a packaging barcode alternates between lines.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Enable packagings
- Create a product AAA
	- barcode 1
- Create a packaging 6-Pack
	- 6 units
	- barcode for AAA set to 6
- Create a PO
	- one line for 30 units of AAA
	- one line for 5 6-Pack of AAA
- Confirm PO and open picking in barcode
- Scan "6" multiple times

> Quantity increases on both lines, alternating for each scan

Cause
-----
Both lines can be found as matching lines when doing

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d279632db25713dd639a51385cad197dfdbd2bdc/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1426

The reason it alternates between the lines is because we set the currently selected line first in the array - and since both lines match, the `foundLine` returned ends up being the non-selected line.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d279632db25713dd639a51385cad197dfdbd2bdc/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1823-L1832

We can avoid this y refining the `break` condition of the loop to also match the packaging uom.

-----
Ticket:
opw-6034572

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116961
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112578

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117280

**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#117450
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115085

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117453
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114156

In Mexico, the basic salary must be calculated based on the total calendar days of the period. This ensures that both worked days and non-working days (e.g. Sundays) contribute equally to the total payment. This calculation also applies to the daily schedule, as the proportional daily wage must be divided equivalently across the hours of the day.

Current behavior:
When an employee has an unpaid leave, the basic salary is incorrectly prorated using only the registered days/hours.
Example: For a monthly wage of 30,000 MXN in a month with 22 scheduled days (21 attendances + 1 unpaid leave), the implicit daily rate becomes 1,363.63 (30,000 / 22). This leads to an incorrect basic salary of 28,636.36 MXN for the days worked. This also happens with unpaid leave for x hours, e.g., for 2 hours, the unpaid leave is calculated as 2 hours * (30,000 / (22 days * 8 hours)) = 340.90 MXN, which is incorrect.

Expected behavior:
The basic salary should be derived from the full period (e.g., 30 days for a month, 15 for a bi-weekly period).
Example: For a 30,000 MXN wage, the daily rate should be 1,000 MXN (30,000 / 30 days). If there is 1 unpaid leave, the basic salary should be 29,000 MXN (29 days * 1,000 MXN), regardless of the number of scheduled working days in the calendar. For unpaid leaves by hours, e.g., for 2 hours, the unpaid leave should be calculated as 2 hours * (30,000 / (30 days * 8 hours)) = 250.00 MXN.

To achieve this, the calculation of the days in the `_get_worked_day_lines` is:
* Adjust worked days/hours for out-of-contract entries where necessary, ensuring that rest days(Sundays) are included in the count.
* Get all worked hours in the lines.
* Calculate the number of days to pay based on the total hours and the hours per day.

### Case: payslip does not cover the complete pay period
Current behavior:
If a payslip is created for a partial period, the total amount is the full period wage.

Expected behavior:
The total amount should be pro-rated based on the days of the period. For example, if a payslip is created for 25 days(with a monthly schedule pay), the total amount should be the daily salary multiplied by 25 days.

To achieve this, `_compute_amount` is updated to calculate the wage based on the `l10n_mx_daily_salary`.

Changes on tests:
* Add:
  * `test_monthly_payslip_with_partial_leave`, `test_partial_payslip`, `test_partial_payslip_new_hire_month_31_days` and `test_partial_payslip_new_hire_month_28_days`.
  * `test_hourly_payslip_by_attendance` to validate when `Work Entry Source` is set to "attendance".
* Update:
  * `test_hourly_payslip`, `test_monthly_payslip` and `test_partial_payslip_new_hire` to align with the new calculation.
  * Adjust payslips dates to match the `schedule_pay` in `test_regular_payslip_subsidy` and `test_weekly_schedule_pay_no_code`
  * Fix a one-day difference in `TestMxEdiHrPayrollCommon`(16 days instead of 15 days for a bi-weekly schedule), and update the corresponding CFDI values.
* Refactor tests and add new helpers.

### Error on [warning issues generation][1] and [`_compute_is_wrong_duration`][2]

The warning: `"The duration of the payslip is not accurate according to the structure type."` appears with these custom periods for Mexican Payroll, although the period is correct:
* `10_days`
* `14_days`
* `bi-weekly`

Steps to replicate:
* Install `l10n_mx_hr_payroll` module.
* Switch to "INNOVACION VALOR Y DESARROLLO SA SA" company.
* Go to Employees and open "Cesar Osbaldo Cruz Solorzano".
* Click on "Payroll" tab, change the "Pay Schedule" to any option listed above, for example "Bi-weekly".
* Go to Payroll > Payslips > Payslips and create a new pay run.
* Select Salary Structure 'Mexico: Regular Pay', Pay Schedule 'Bi-weekly' and the Period '01/01/2026 -> 01/15/2026'.
* Click on "Continue", select Cesar and click on "Select".
* It appears the warning issue.

Problem:
The warning is raised because of `slip.date_from + slip._get_schedule_timedelta() != slip.date_to` condition, because `_get_schedule_timedelta` function calls [`self._schedule_timedelta(schedule, self.date_from)`][3] without the `country_code` argument.
In the Mexican Payroll [_schedule_timedelta is overriden][4] but it is necessary to call it with the country code to use the custom periods; similar to how the [`date_end` is computed][5].

Solution:
Call `_get_schedule_timedelta` passing the `country_code`

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1666ac87b6cb40e904210fecd159df3ac5b6b33a/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1367
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1666ac87b6cb40e904210fecd159df3ac5b6b33a/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1454
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1666ac87b6cb40e904210fecd159df3ac5b6b33a/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L275
[4]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1666ac87b6cb40e904210fecd159df3ac5b6b33a/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L58
[5]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1666ac87b6cb40e904210fecd159df3ac5b6b33a/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip_run.py#L211

target: 19.0
task-6073601

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116883
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112524

Issue:
----------------------------------------
In the Planning Gantt view when we don't group by resources, the total row is not considering the working hours.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Open Planning
- Remove the default group by resources
- Have at least a planning slot for a non-flexible employee
- The total row doesn't take the working schedule into account

Cause:
----------------------------------------
Since [an improvement,](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/cc35e1a4729453e4f788034a94402ab048eadfcb) the working hours data in given to the `PlanningGanttRenderer` through the progress bars data. This is an issue because the progress bars are only there if we group by resources. ([src](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/423ab064847dd41d36778a812390e3bec53ba4dc/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L2669-L2678))

Solution:
----------------------------------------
In this commit we partially revert the commit adding the working intervals in the progress bars. Instead of doing it in `_gantt_progress_bar_resource_id()` we create a new method `_get_gantt_planning_data()` which is called directly in `get_gantt_data()` and returns useful information even when there are no progress bars.

opw-5507063

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116914
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112522

## Issue
When generating a payslip for an employee of a company located in Colorado, the *CO State Income Tax* could end up positive.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *United States - Payroll* (`l10n_us_hr_payroll`)
2. Set the current company's State to Colorado
3. Create an employee and a contract
    - Wage: $0
    - (Set the contract's status to *Running*)
    - (In the payroll tab) State Withholding Allowance: $1000
4. Create a Payslip for the employee
    - Structure: *"United States: Regular Pay"*
5. Compute Sheet
6. **In the _Salary Computation_ tab, the _CO State Income Tax_ line has a positive value**

## Justification
This fix is similar to the one applied for the AL(abama) state income tax by https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/f0eeb55f1e3cf965c6a409675813d4a699e5fca6. That modification was justified by CAS (PO of US localizations for Payroll) in opw-5137280:

> *"Payroll taxes are always funds withheld from employee's paychecks, if there is a positive value it means the tax is a refund, not a withholding. Refunds happen when individuals file their income."*

## Note to reviewer
The test [`test_069_al_state_tax_0_income`](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/219d2a797ee2099c9d77c2defc9c9c5e1d504ffe/test_l10n_us_hr_payroll_account/tests/test_salary_rules.py#L957-L989) (added by the aforementioned commit https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/f0eeb55f1e3cf965c6a409675813d4a699e5fca6) is wrongly indented and thus never executed. The test passes with the dedicated fix, and fails without it, as expected. Let me know if you want me to indent it correctly (in this commit or in an additional one).



opw-5999856

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117497
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112724

This commit addresses an issue where generating the Appendix 142 report with no data would result in an error, and updates the Vietnamese VAT return type to use the overarching composite tax report.

Modifications:
- Added defensive checks to handle empty report lines. If the list is empty, it now safely returns the export HTML with default empty/zeroed contextual variables. Added bounds and existence checks for the base amount and VAT amount indexes to prevent out-of-bounds errors when evaluating purchase lines, sales lines, and section totals.
- Changed the report reference on the Vietnamese tax return type record to use the composite tax report rather than the standalone form 01 report.
- Swapped the data loading order in the module manifest to load tax report data before return data to resolve external ID dependencies.
- Adjusted report sequences so the main Vietnamese Tax Report appears first (sequence 10) and the Purchase/Sale Invoice List appears second (sequence 20).

Task-6216318

Two bugs stem from the payrun "step bubble" bar (Employees → Time [→ Attendance] → Payslips):

1. When a payrun not containing attendance-tracked employees is opened first and I change one of the employee's tracking method to attendance, going back via breadcrumb I'd see that the Attendance bubble incorrectly appears for the latter. The root cause is that cachePayRunSteps is a Map iterated in insertion order: "attendance" is appended after "payslip" the first time it is encountered, so it always renders last regardless of the server-defined canonical order. Fixed by turning it into an array overridden at every data fetch.

2. When navigating back to the payrun list via breadcrumb after changing the last of an employee's work_entry_source (e.g. removing the last attendance-tracked employee from a payrun), the bubble still shows the previous state. Fixed by marking the payrun as fresh when following specific flow, preventing the reload of the bubbles using instead the previously cached ones.

task-5959087

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117590

Currently, a CSS rule forces the form container width to 1px to ensure that the nested list view can correctly compute its size.

See:

```scss
.o_form_view.o_xxl_form_view {
    .o_form_view_container {
        width: 1px; /* List view needs a width value to recompute the size correctly */
    }
}
```

However, since the Knowledge editor is implemented as a form view, this rule also affects Knowledge. When zooming out, the `o_xxl_form_view` class is added to the form view container, causing the rule to apply. If an article is printed while this class is present, it is constrained to an extremely narrow column, making it unreadable.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open an article in Knowledge
2. Zoom out using `Ctrl` + `-`
3. Open the kebab menu and select "Export"

=> The article is rendered in a very narrow column.

To address this issue, we override this rule specifically for Knowledge. With this change, articles are now rendered correctly when printed or exported as PDF.

Task-5999878

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103259

Currently, an error is raised when creating a new website page after a
custom or existing page marked as `Is a Template`, if the view architecture
does not contain a div with `id="wrap"`.

Steps to produce an error:
- Go to the website and create a new website page (e.g., test).
- Go to the newly created page and make sure the website edition menu is open
- Click on Site > Properties > Enable `Is a Template` > Save & Close
- Go to Site > Pages
- Click `Bug icon` on the above created page (or open the view of the above
  created page as `website.test`).
- Remove the div that contains `id="wrap"` from the view (mostly users do it
  to customize the view) and save it.
- Go to Site > Pages > Click New > An error will occur.

This error occurs because the code at line [1] tries to access the first
element of the list returned by `html_tree.xpath('//div[@id="wrap"]')`.
However, if the user has removed this `div`, the list is empty and accessing
the first element raises an error.

This commit fixes the above issue by skipping custom templates from the
result if the template does not contain a `wrap_el(id="wrap")`.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f592fba684225f059fb60c38878e0554ae3e6ac8/addons/website/controllers/main.py#L707

Sentry-7315470405

Currently an exception is generated when the user submits the custom
website form after following the below steps:

- Install `web_studio`, `website` and `crm`
- Go to the website > Open the website editor > Add a form to the website
- Configure the form as below:
      Action: Click `More models` > select `crm.tead`
      Field: add any custom
- Save the form
- Now an error is generated in the backend when the user submits the form.

The error was caused by submitting a form without a required field, leading
to a `NotNullViolation` during insertion at code line [1]. This was caught as
an `IntegrityError` at code line [2], but since the transaction was not rolled
back (broken transaction), it remained in a failed state. Consequently, a
subsequent operation triggered an `InFailedSqlTransaction` error when
attempting to close the savepoint at code line [3].

This commit will solve the above issue by rolling back the cursor when
the `IntegrityError` error occurs while submitting the form.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c21c481eecf11a2e6e8bb21aa907e0aee870e3da/addons/website/controllers/form.py#L77
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c21c481eecf11a2e6e8bb21aa907e0aee870e3da/addons/website/controllers/form.py#L98
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c21c481eecf11a2e6e8bb21aa907e0aee870e3da/addons/website/controllers/form.py#L53

Sentry-7260662088,7327198011

*=website_helpdesk_slides_forum,website_helpdesk_forum

Currently an exception is generated when the user tries to open the community
forum of the helpdesk by following steps.

- Install `Website Slides Forum Helpdesk (website_helpdesk_slides_forum)`
- Go to `Helpdesk` > `Configuration` > `Helpdesk team` > `Customer care`
- Set more than one forums inside `Community Forum` and save
- Go to the website  and open `Help` page
- Error will generate when clicking `Ask the community`

First Error:
`QWebError: Error while rendering the template: KeyError: '_forums'`

Second error when we try above step by only installing `website_helpdesk_forum`: `ValueError: View 'website_helpdesk_forum.forum_all' in website 1 not...`

The first error occurs because the code line [1] renders the template
`website_helpdesk_slides_forum.helpdesk_forums` (we will get this template
id from `get_template_xml_id` method (at code line [2])), which inherits from
`website_forum.forum_all_all_entries`. The inherited template expects the
`_forums` variable to be defined. However, since we call the template directly without
providing `_forums`, the template tries to access it and raises a KeyError.

The second error occurs when rendering the `website_helpdesk_forum.forum_all`
template, whose XML ID is retrieved using the `get_template_xml_id` method (see line [3]).
This template does not actually exist, so when the system attempts to load it, the rendering process fails.

This commit resolves the issue by rendering the `website_forum.forum_all`
template instead of the template returned by `get_template_xml_id`, since the
templates returned by that method either do not exist or cannot properly handle
forums. The website_forum.forum_all template is designed to manage all forums,
so it reliably covers the required use case.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6658581828dcdc43ffc5823814a05cb936cd0500/website_helpdesk_forum/controllers/website_forum.py#L20-L22
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6658581828dcdc43ffc5823814a05cb936cd0500/website_helpdesk_slides_forum/controllers/website_forum.py#L9-L10
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6658581828dcdc43ffc5823814a05cb936cd0500/website_helpdesk_forum/controllers/website_forum.py#L24-L25

sentry-7159323242