The CTE `model_fees` is supposed to get the reconciliation models that match conditions that involves a join with the ir.model.data table. One of these conditions is filtering based on the `name` field with an `LIKE` operator.

On databases that has a GIST index on the field `name`, the planner will prefer to filter the records based using the GIST index and add the extra filters as a filtering criteria after the index condition if the index-condition wasn't possible to be switched to a range-query. The condition is supposed to be a prefix-matching, which can be evaluated directly by a B-TREE if the field had an index and the planner can convert the condition to a range-query.

Apparently the `_` in `account_reco_models_fees_%%` was evaluated as a wild-card, making the condition a substring-matching rather than direct prefix-matching. In this PR, I have modified the condition to escape the '_' wildcards.

The benchmark done below was on a database that has around **10^7** `ir.model.data` records and 1K `account.reconciliation.model` records. I have split the benchmark into two cases, a case where the buffer-pool of
postgres warmed-up and a case where it is not.

After Worst case -> https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/975geg1f1h109d5c
Before Worst case -> https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/0ce9bf3g0ad8f98b

After Best Case -> https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/1a77459dadb0gfc4

Definition of ir_model_data_name_idx2  -> CREATE INDEX ir_model_data_name_idx2 ON public.ir_model_data USING gist (name gist_trgm_ops)

Definition of ir_model_data_module_name_uniq_index -> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX ir_model_data_module_name_uniq_index ON public.ir_model_data USING btree (module, name)


| PostgreSQL Buffer Pool Status | Before | After |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Not warmed up (Cold) | 11s | 130ms |
| Warmed up (Hot) | 0.022ms | 0.097ms |

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117746

### Issue
In the Italian annual tax report, both VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33 values could be displayed at the same time

However, according to the report logic, only the positive balance should be shown for each pair:
- VL3 (Tax Due) or VL4 (Tax Credit)
- VL32 (Tax Due) or VL33 (Tax Credit)

The other one should stay 0
If the global balance is null, both can be 0

### Cause
The lines VL3, VL4, VL32, and VL33 were using the shortcut field `aggregation_formula` directly on the `account.report.line` record
This shortcut format does not evaluate or support conditional subformulas like `if_above(EUR(0))`
As a result, the report computed and displayed both lines of each pair without filtering out the negative or unwanted values

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_it` and `accountant` and switch to IT Company
- Create a balanced Journal Entry for any account
- Add the Tax Grid v20 on one of the lines to impact the annual report
- Open the `Annual Tax Report (IT)` 
- Go to the `VL` section
- Check the value of VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33
After the fix, only one value can be positive and the other 0

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6212694)
opw-6212694

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264294

*: html_editor, html_builder

### Commit 1:
[FIX] html_editor, website: improve helper util setSelection and tests
**Before this commit**: after the selection restriction commit (https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/d09c8fd428315b8c3bf08c43d55da50fcd77f2ae),
the tests have to dispatch events specifically to mimic the selection
made by mouse.

**After this commit:** we improve the setSelection helper to include a flag
isMouseEventSimulated and simplify the tests.

task-6143995


### Commit 2:
[FIX] html_builder*: improve selection correction for nested uncrossable
*: website

**Before this commit:** correctSelectionOnUncrossable is not exhaustive for
complex html snippets. When there are multiple uncrossable elements in
the selection, and there's a parent uncrossable element including other
uncrossable ones, the selection is only restricted on the parent
uncrossable element.

We had a fix for the select all behavior but not for mouse selection.
Reproduction:
- Have a blockquote snippet with some text around it
- Select the text from the blockquote to the text after it => it will
keep the authors info selected
- And then, if I click on the text, the selection will restrict to the
text without the author infos

**After this commit:** We now always correct the selection on uncrossable in
an iterative way, until the selection is not corrected anymore or a
maximum of attempts is reached.

We didn't use the loop condition like previously done. Because there can
still be an uncrossable inside the selection, when the closest
uncrossable elements of the focus node and anchor node are the same.
Instead, we stop the looping when the selection isn't being corrected
anymore.

task-6143995



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

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Prevent an internal server error when a customer cancels a Redsys payment
and returns to Odoo.

Current behavior before PR:

When the customer cancels the payment from the Redsys checkout page,
Redsys redirects back to Odoo without the `Ds_MerchantParameters`
parameter.

The payment flow assumes the parameter is always present and tries to
decode it unconditionally, causing an internal server error.

Desired behavior after PR is merged:

Odoo gracefully handles payment cancellations when
`Ds_MerchantParameters` is missing from the callback parameters.

The customer is redirected correctly without triggering a server error.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Install the Redsys payment provider.
2. Configure a test environment.
3. Create a sales order or invoice.
4. Start the payment process.
5. Cancel the payment from the Redsys checkout page.
6. Return to Odoo.
7. Observe the internal server error caused by the missing
   `Ds_MerchantParameters` parameter.


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265655

### Issue
In the Italian annual tax report, both VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33 values could be displayed at the same time

However, according to the report logic, only the positive balance should be shown for each pair:
- VL3 (Tax Due) or VL4 (Tax Credit)
- VL32 (Tax Due) or VL33 (Tax Credit)

The other one should stay 0
If the global balance is null, both can be 0

### Cause
The lines VL3, VL4, VL32, and VL33 were using the shortcut field `aggregation_formula` directly on the `account.report.line` record
This shortcut format does not evaluate or support conditional subformulas like `if_above(EUR(0))`
As a result, the report computed and displayed both lines of each pair without filtering out the negative or unwanted values

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_it` and `accountant` and switch to IT Company
- Create a balanced Journal Entry for any account
- Add the Tax Grid v20 on one of the lines to impact the annual report
- Open the `Annual Tax Report (IT)` 
- Go to the `VL` section
- Check the value of VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33
After the fix, only one value can be positive and the other 0

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6212694)
opw-6212694

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264294

Problem: When both line discounts and global discounts are applied on a product in an invoice, the method `_add_and_round_raw_gross_total_excluded_and_discount` does not return the exact raw_gross_total_excluded before the modification done by other AccountTax helper methods, such as dispatching and squashing global discount lines.

Current Behavior: The calculation is done in the wrong order of operations. For example, there is an invoice for Product A valued at $100 with a discount of 10% and a global discount of $10. The raw_total_excluded will be $80 after the both discounts. The discount_factor is based on only the line discount of 10%. The formula of the current calculation for raw_gross_total_excluded is: (raw_total_excluded / (1 - (line_discount / 100))) - global_discount = (80 / 0.90) - (-10)
= 98.889
This does not equal the expected outcome of $100.

Expected Behavior: Based on the previous example, the formula for the calculation should be:
(raw_total_excluded - global_discount) / (1 - (line_discount/100)) = (80 - (-10)) / 0.9
= 100
The global discount needs to be added back to the raw_total_excluded to get the line discounted amount in order to divide by the discount_factor to gain the expected raw_gross_total_excluded before taxes and discounts.

Steps to reproduce the issue:
- Bug was encountered when implementing a global discount solution for l10n_co_dian.
- Create an invoice with a product line and in-line discount and another line for global discount
- Setup the base lines for the invoice and attempt the following:
 - _dispatch_global_discount_lines
 - _squash_global_discount_lines
 - _add_and_round_raw_gross_total_excluded_and_discount

opw-5412446


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266584
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262137

Currently an error is generated when the user tries to cancel a
draft POS order as follows:

- Install the `pos_enterprise` module with demo data
- Open the register of `Furniture store` and select any product
- Click on the `Upload` icon to save the draft order and go to the backend.
- Navigate Orders > Orders > open Draft order
- Click the `cog` icon and click `Cancel Order` >>> Error occurs

This issue is caused by the recent refactor introduced in [1]. The
`action_pos_order_cancel` action now returns the `order`
(`pos.order` recordset) instead of default returning `None`.

As a result, the `action` variable contains a `pos.order` recordset, and
an error is raised at line [2] when `setdefault` is called on it, since
`setdefault` expects a dictionary-like object.

This commit fixes the above issue by removing the code that returns the
`pos.order` object from the action. As a result, the action now behaves
as expected and returns the default value (`None`).


[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/27f57036a1d0468efe6e68d7aceafe0f01b21f93
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/48f93ca056633bd5cba36b66ee1008fb57ca666c/addons/web/controllers/utils.py#L24

Sentry-7354160052

### Issue
In the Italian annual tax report, both VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33 values could be displayed at the same time

However, according to the report logic, only the positive balance should be shown for each pair:
- VL3 (Tax Due) or VL4 (Tax Credit)
- VL32 (Tax Due) or VL33 (Tax Credit)

The other one should stay 0
If the global balance is null, both can be 0

### Cause
The lines VL3, VL4, VL32, and VL33 were using the shortcut field `aggregation_formula` directly on the `account.report.line` record
This shortcut format does not evaluate or support conditional subformulas like `if_above(EUR(0))`
As a result, the report computed and displayed both lines of each pair without filtering out the negative or unwanted values

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_it` and `accountant` and switch to IT Company
- Create a balanced Journal Entry for any account
- Add the Tax Grid v20 on one of the lines to impact the annual report
- Open the `Annual Tax Report (IT)` 
- Go to the `VL` section
- Check the value of VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33
After the fix, only one value can be positive and the other 0

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6212694)
opw-6212694

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264294

Problem: When both line discounts and global discounts are applied on a product in an invoice, the method `_add_and_round_raw_gross_total_excluded_and_discount` does not return the exact raw_gross_total_excluded before the modification done by other AccountTax helper methods, such as dispatching and squashing global discount lines.

Current Behavior: The calculation is done in the wrong order of operations. For example, there is an invoice for Product A valued at $100 with a discount of 10% and a global discount of $10. The raw_total_excluded will be $80 after the both discounts. The discount_factor is based on only the line discount of 10%. The formula of the current calculation for raw_gross_total_excluded is: (raw_total_excluded / (1 - (line_discount / 100))) - global_discount = (80 / 0.90) - (-10)
= 98.889
This does not equal the expected outcome of $100.

Expected Behavior: Based on the previous example, the formula for the calculation should be:
(raw_total_excluded - global_discount) / (1 - (line_discount/100)) = (80 - (-10)) / 0.9
= 100
The global discount needs to be added back to the raw_total_excluded to get the line discounted amount in order to divide by the discount_factor to gain the expected raw_gross_total_excluded before taxes and discounts.

Steps to reproduce the issue:
- Bug was encountered when implementing a global discount solution for l10n_co_dian.
- Create an invoice with a product line and in-line discount and another line for global discount
- Setup the base lines for the invoice and attempt the following:
 - _dispatch_global_discount_lines
 - _squash_global_discount_lines
 - _add_and_round_raw_gross_total_excluded_and_discount

opw-5412446


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266584
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262137

When having an horizontal group with domain including two companies that
share the same account codes, report lines with account codes engine
don't display the two companies values when both are selected in the
company selector.

Steps to reproduce:

- Install l10n_ch and create two CH companies (CH1 and CH2)
- Create an horizontal group with the field 'Company' and domain '["|",
  ("name", "=", "CH Company"), ("name", "=", "CH 2")]"
- Apply the Horizontal group to CH balance sheet report
- Select both companies in the company selector
- Open CH BS report and activate the horizontal group
-> Only the column of one company is filled

Fix:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/9b775ed9d8b2a18e708219c72e95652571f3936a
was introduced in 19.0 to fix the same issue, we fix by backporting it
but we also need to backport this perf commit https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/7da3123dc4487a7092deef8503a9791ceffddcfb
that refactored the code before in a first place

opw-6204601

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118544
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117103

### Issue
In the Italian annual tax report, both VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33 values could be displayed at the same time

However, according to the report logic, only the positive balance should be shown for each pair:
- VL3 (Tax Due) or VL4 (Tax Credit)
- VL32 (Tax Due) or VL33 (Tax Credit)

The other one should stay 0
If the global balance is null, both can be 0

### Cause
The lines VL3, VL4, VL32, and VL33 were using the shortcut field `aggregation_formula` directly on the `account.report.line` record
This shortcut format does not evaluate or support conditional subformulas like `if_above(EUR(0))`
As a result, the report computed and displayed both lines of each pair without filtering out the negative or unwanted values

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_it` and `accountant` and switch to IT Company
- Create a balanced Journal Entry for any account
- Add the Tax Grid v20 on one of the lines to impact the annual report
- Open the `Annual Tax Report (IT)` 
- Go to the `VL` section
- Check the value of VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33
After the fix, only one value can be positive and the other 0

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6212694)
opw-6212694

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264294

**Problem:**
When a branch user with no access to the parent company tries to create a transaction for a parent company's journal with a foreign currency set, this will raise an access error.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Make a branch of "My Company (San Francisco)"
- Set user "Marc Demo" to only have access to the branch
- Add a new bank journal set to "EUR" currency
- Switch to Marc Demo
- Try to add a transaction in the new bank journal

**Root Cause:**
When a transaction is created, Odoo determines the amount in company currency by converting it from the foreign currency. The method to convert currency uses "with_company()" to use the company's rates, but the allowed companies of the branch user does not have access to the parent company, causing an access error.

**Solution:**
Call the currency conversion with sudo() to ensure access to the relevant companies.

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6186901)
opw-6186901

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263668
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263425

### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
Prevent Out of Memory (OOM) crashes and drastically improve execution speed when generating the Swedish SIE4 verification export for massive datasets.

### Current behavior before PR:
When exporting a large volume of journal entries (e.g., 190,000+ account moves), the `_export_l10n_se_sie4_verification` method relies on iterating through heavy ORM recordsets and accessing relational child fields (move.line_ids) inside a loop. This triggers a severe N+1 query problem, maxing out server RAM and causing an OOM crash.

### Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The method now utilizes a hybrid data extraction approach:
- The ORM is used strictly to safely evaluate domains (multi-company rules, dates, states) and fetch a lightweight list of valid move_ids.
- A single SQL query with JOIN statements fetches all parent moves, child lines, and account codes in exactly one database query.
- itertools.groupby chunks the flat, lightweight dictionary results back into their respective journal entries.
The export now handles massive datasets in seconds with minimal memory overhead, while remaining perfectly secure.

### Benchmark:

For Memory:
| # Input Data | Before PR | After PR |
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| ~190,000 moves | MemoryError | 407MB|
| ~200,000 moves | 1.8GB | 174.8 MB|

For Speed:
| # Input Data | Before PR | After PR |
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| ~190,000 moves | MemoryError | 5.10s |
| ~200,000 moves | 1m29s| 5.3s|

### Reference:
opw-6067999

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117577
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113227

The "show only 1 month at a time" optimization computes the navigated month as datetime.now() + month_id, so the controller passes that (month, year) tuple to _get_appointment_slots:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/57ec37b74a60c7e879a8afa66df5ab22a92c5bcd/appointment/models/appointment_type.py#L833

For a punctual appointment whose Allow Bookings range starts in a future month, the first displayed month is start_datetime.month, so the (month, year) tuple doesn't match the month the visitor is looking at. The model fills an empty month and the recovery loop refills the first displayed month (where slots actually live):

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/57ec37b74a60c7e879a8afa66df5ab22a92c5bcd/appointment/models/appointment_type.py#L973-L988

The calendar the visitor just navigated to comes back empty.

Compute the navigation base from start_datetime when it lies in the future and keep datetime.now() otherwise. month_id is added on top of that base so it always matches the displayed month index.

Introduced by https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/664857dd2c4ae2bc0dde8f44cb94136659ed2fe2

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open the Appointments app
2. Open an appointment type and set Schedule to Weekly and Allow Bookings to On specific dates with a range starting in a future month (for example 1 September to 31 December)
3. Save and click the Preview button in the header
4. Pick a staff member to reach the calendar
5. Click the right arrow to navigate to the next month

=> the next month shows "Sorry, we have no more slots available for this month"

opw-6206293

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Install l10n_es_edi_verifactu.
2. Switch to a ES company.
3. Create a customer invoice and send it to VeriFactu.
4. Enable Developer Mode.
5. Go to Settings > Technical > Sequences & Identifiers > Sequences.
6. Search for the `Sequence Code: l10n_es_edi_verifactu` and open it.
7. Set a prefix or suffix using any alphabetical character.
8. Create a new invoice and send it to VeriFactu

**Issue:**
Traceback on sending Veri*Factu:
`ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: 'F260001'`

**Cause:**
The value returned by `ir.sequence.next_by_id()` may contain alphabetical characters (due to prefix/suffix), while the field `chain_index` expects an integer. The raw sequence value was directly assigned, causing the conversion to fail.

**Fix:**
Catch the ValueError raised by int() when the sequence value contains non-numeric characters (e.g. due to a prefix/suffix). Instead of crashing, surface a user-friendly error on the document telling the user to remove the prefix/suffix from the sequence configuration.

**opw-6037528**

**Issue:**
The printed receipt in Point of Sale displayed a negative change amount when the customer paid more than the order total.

**Before:**
The receipt showed the change as a negative value (e.g., `-$5,504.00`), which was misleading for customers.

**After:**
The receipt now correctly displays the change as a positive value (e.g., `$5,504.00`).

**Steps to Reproduce:**

1. Open a Point of Sale session
2. Add products to the cart (example total: `$49,496.00`)
3. Select the **Cash** payment method
4. Enter an amount greater than the order total (example: `$55,000.00`)
5. Observe that the **Change** field displays a negative value
6. Confirm the payment
7. Print the receipt and observe that the change amount is also negative

**Root Cause:**
The issue was caused by an unnecessary negation in the `export_for_printing()` method in `pos_order.js`.

The `get_change()` method already returns the correct positive change amount. However, the code applied an extra negation (`-this.get_change()`), which converted the value into a negative amount before rendering it on the receipt.

**Fix:**
Removed the unnecessary negation in `export_for_printing()` so the receipt now displays the correct positive change amount.

Video reproducing the issue: [[Click here to view the video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QnQ47qlTFvv98K0J_NzreBVeIh-J2XcF/view?usp=sharing)]

opw-6211988

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

### Issue
In the Italian annual tax report, both VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33 values could be displayed at the same time

However, according to the report logic, only the positive balance should be shown for each pair:
- VL3 (Tax Due) or VL4 (Tax Credit)
- VL32 (Tax Due) or VL33 (Tax Credit)

The other one should stay 0
If the global balance is null, both can be 0

### Cause
The lines VL3, VL4, VL32, and VL33 were using the shortcut field `aggregation_formula` directly on the `account.report.line` record
This shortcut format does not evaluate or support conditional subformulas like `if_above(EUR(0))`
As a result, the report computed and displayed both lines of each pair without filtering out the negative or unwanted values

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_it` and `accountant` and switch to IT Company
- Create a balanced Journal Entry for any account
- Add the Tax Grid v20 on one of the lines to impact the annual report
- Open the `Annual Tax Report (IT)` 
- Go to the `VL` section
- Check the value of VL3/VL4 and VL32/VL33
After the fix, only one value can be positive and the other 0

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6212694)
opw-6212694

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264294

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable: "Units of Measure & Packagings", "Storage Locations"
- Create a product in units and register 1 unit in stock
- Inventory > Operations > Adjustments > Physical Inventory
- Select your line and request a count > Set Current Value
- Inventory > Configurations > units of measures > UOM categories
- Select unit and archive it
- Go to the barcode app > Click Count inventory
### > Owl error: Uncaught promise

### Cause of the issue:

Since the uom used on the quant is archived, it is not found by the search used to fill the barcodeCache:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/static/src/components/main.js#L209-L213 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/models/stock_quant.py#L104-L106 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/static/src/components/main.js#L229 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L37-L39 However, if the uom is not present in the barcode cache the `BarcodeQautnModel` will fail to createLinesState whihc raises a missing error:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_quant_model.js#L712 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/26546bcd3beebc7f65ce08385441b6284b46598e/stock_barcode/static/src/lazy_barcode_cache.js#L107-L110

opw-6250090

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Install `sale_project_stock` and Accounting.
2. Create a storable product with **Real-time valuation** and 
configure the COGS account in the product category expense account.
(Ensure you have enabled automatic & analytic accounting from accounting>config.)
3. Create a project with a specific analytic account and ensure the project is billable.
4. Create a sale order with the created product and set the same
analytic account in the analytic distribution.
5. Confirm the order, deliver the product, generate the invoice, and post it.
6. Open the project and go to the *Profitability* report.
7. Click on the **Cost of Goods Sold** dashboard item.
8. Repeat steps 4–7 with multiple invoices.

Issue:
------
When there is only one invoice, clicking the COGS dashboard item correctly
displays the related move lines. However, when there are multiple invoices,
the action opens with empty results.

Cause:
------
`_get_action_for_profitability_section` sets `res_id` only when a single record exists. 
When multiple records are present, `res_id` becomes `False`, which causes the action to open without results. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f79d407724f40ba8e48f1747b2e87311b7fb49e/addons/project_account/models/project_project.py#L78-L83

Solution:
---------
When `res_id` is not set, search `account.move` records using the
domain to retrieve the relevant move IDs, then apply a proper domain
to display all related COGS journal items.


opw-5949261



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

**Issue**:
Non-purchasable products can still be found when searching using a vendor product code.

**Steps to reproduce**:
- Create a product
- Add a vendor with a vendor product code (use a code that does not match any product name)
- Untick the "can be purchased" box
- Create a PO with the same vendor
- Search for product using the vendor product code -> The product can be found while not purchasable

**Cause**:
While searching for a product, `_name_search` is called: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2083a2515c2855dd53991cbcc6e8b43c3e7f0256/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L543 If no product is found (which is very likely since we use vendor product code): https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2083a2515c2855dd53991cbcc6e8b43c3e7f0256/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L580-L581 Then check all the vendor list associated to the vendor product code (`product_code`) and extract the associated product: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2083a2515c2855dd53991cbcc6e8b43c3e7f0256/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L582-L588 However, this fallback search does not reuse the original `domain`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2083a2515c2855dd53991cbcc6e8b43c3e7f0256/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L543 therefore conditions such as `purchase_ok = True` are ignored.

**Solution**
Backport the fix from this commit: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c2d47b976d1ac0eba6bd16add3d54f84e5e2d3d3. And in particular:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/299b3b833a2198c6814141c037a9bd6c69f14ee3/addons/product/models/product_product.py#L647-L648

opw-6214085