Currently, when a user deletes a line and validates internal movement in the barcode system, the system allows validation even though specifying the destination location after each scan is required.

## Steps to produce:
- Install the Inventory module
- Go to Settings and enable Storage Locations.
- Inventory > Configuration > Operation Types > Internal Transfers > Barcode App
- Configure the Destination Location to require scanning after each product.
- Create an Internal Transfer for Pedal Bin, demand 1.
- Mark the transfer as To Do and open it in the Barcode app.
- Add quantity using +1, then scan the barcode for the Pedal Bin(Barcode: 6016478556493).
- Delete the newly added line and attempt to Validate.

## Observed Behavior:
The system should prevent transfer validation when the destination location has not been scanned and display a notification to the user, similar to the behavior before user deleted the newly added line.

## Root cause:
This issue occurs because when the delete button is pressed, the deleteLine function [1] removes the line, but the deleted line becomes the selected line due to [2] being triggered before the UI updates.

As a result, the selected line is now undefined. Since the selected line is undefined, it fails to meet the condition at [3] during validation. This prevents notifications from being triggered and allows the transfer to be validated before the destination location has been scanned.
[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3476d15bf8e75eb6530658dd623861b60963ab40/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L826-L836 [2] :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/327d4478128f33fb2e0c477533bd4983178abf17/stock_barcode/static/src/components/line.js#L129-L133 [3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6ff158ca3a6d2d2b3d285a7f8317622844811688/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L945-L948

## Solution:
We can prevent users from validating if any line has an unscanned destination location when destination-location scanning is mandatory after scanning each product.

To enforce this behavior, we can track whether a line has been modified and whether a destination location has been scanned and applied to that line. This allows us to identify which lines still require destination location scanning before validation can proceed.

However, line state information is currently discarded and recreated on every save. As a result, information about lines that were updated and already had their destination location scanned is lost. This may incorrectly require users to rescan the destination location, even though it was previously scanned.

To address this, we preserve the destination-scanned and modified state by carrying it forward from existing lines to their corresponding newly created versions using a loop. This ensures that destination location scan status is retained and users are not asked to rescan unnecessarily.

opw-6069614

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119263
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113618

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the **l10n_es_edi_sii** module.
* Create a **Portuguese customer**.
* Go to **Settings** and enable **EU Intra-community Distance Selling**, then refresh the tax mapping.
* Create a customer invoice with a **"No Sujeto por reglas de localización"** tax (e.g. **23.0% PT VAT**).
* Go to **Accounting → Reporting → Tax Report → OSS Sales**.
* Export the **VAT Record Books (XLSX)** file and open it.

**Observed behavior:**
* The "Clave de Operación" column shows "01" for lines with no_sujeto_loc taxes instead of "17".
* The SII JSON for the same invoice correctly shows "ClaveRegimenEspecialOTrascendencia": "17".

**Cause:**
* In `_l10n_es_libros_get_common_line_vals()`, `operation_code` was computed manually as `'02' if exempt_reason else '01'`, which only handled the E2 exempt case and defaulted everything else to "01".
* This missed OSS/no_sujeto_loc taxes (e.g. FR VAT, PT VAT) that should produce "17" per the Spanish VAT regime code table.

**Fix:**
* Extract operation code computation into a new dedicated method `_l10n_es_libros_get_operation_code()`.
* For customer invoices, delegate to the existing `_l10n_es_get_regime_code()` method already used by SII, which correctly returns "17" for OSS-tagged taxes, "02" for E2 exempt, and "01" otherwise.
* For vendor bills, mirror the SII logic by checking whether the invoice taxes include tags from `mod_303_casilla_10_balance` or `mod_303_casilla_11_balance` (intra-community indicators), returning "09" if so and "01" otherwise.

opw-6197141,6216485

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117236

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267097
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#253639

Currently, an error occurs when the user clicks on the translate button.

**Steps to Reproduce:**

 - Install the `CRM` module.
 - Go to `settings` and in `Languages` add 1 more language.
 - Go to `CRM` > `Configuration` > `Pipeline` > `Tags`.
 - Click `New` and, in the `Name` field click the `translate button` on the right.

**Behavior in 18.0**

When the tag name is not set, the translation dialog opens immediately. If a tag name is entered, 
the translation dialog shows the translated value on the second click.

**Behavior in saas-19.1**

`AssertionError: Invalid falsy real id`

Error:
After this [recent commit], when the user clicks on the translate button, if the record has a 
root record, the root record is saved before opening the translation dialog. However, in the 
case of an editable DynamicList view, the record does not have a root record so saving 
the record returns a promise instead of the resolved value [1].
Because of this promise, the condition fails [2], and the translation dialog is opened with a 
falsy ID since the record is not yet saved [3]. 
In saas-19.1, this issue raises Invalid falsy real id error after [this commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/4290724a4c8c57fba4f4d3d688d38f65dadcc38f).

This commit ensures that await is used so the resolved value is returned after the record is 
saved before opening the translation dialog.

[recent commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/5245ec39a12e7d3a10fcc4c2c92b0f7dbf52d3be

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9e3fc9568fcebcb1de6486d2ab7134e8a12087b7/addons/web/static/src/views/fields/translation_button.js#L23

[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9e3fc9568fcebcb1de6486d2ab7134e8a12087b7/addons/web/static/src/views/fields/translation_button.js#L24-L26

[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9e3fc9568fcebcb1de6486d2ab7134e8a12087b7/addons/web/static/src/views/fields/translation_button.js#L29-L41

sentry-7384270487

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267914

Currently, an error occurs when user tries to select a property field in auto field.

Steps to replicate:
- Install `sale_management` and `sign`.
- Open Sales > Products > Products > Open any product.
- From the Gear icon, Click Edit Properties and save the record.
- Enable Debug mode if you are using a version lower than 19.0 .
- Open Sign > Configuration > Field Types.
- Create a new Field > Give a name > Select model as `Product`.
- Select Field as `Property > Property 1` and click save.

Error:
- saas-18.3 and later:
```
  File '/home/odoo/odoo18/enterprise/sign/models/sign_item_type.py', line 57, in _check_auto_field_exists
    auto_field_value = record.mapped(sign_type.auto_field)
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File '/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py', line 5472, in mapped
    field = records._fields[field_name]
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AttributeError: 'Property' object has no attribute '_fields'. Did you mean: 'field'?
```

- saas-18.2:
```
  File '/home/odoo/odoo18/enterprise/sign/models/sign_item_type.py, line 41, in _check_auto_field_exists
    auto_field_value = record.mapped(sign_type.auto_field)
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File '/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py', line 5744, in mapped
    if len(records) > PREFETCH_MAX:
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^
TypeError: object of type 'bool' has no len()
```

Cause:
- As the user gave auto fill field as a Property field the [line] called `mapped()` to access its value, this caused the error to occur.

- This occurs because `mapped()` expects a `recordset` (models.Model), but instead it receives a Property object, which does not have `_fields`.

Solution:
- Using `'allow_properties': 'False'`, the property fields wont appear in the list of field selection.

[line]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/cdaeb79e1f623831fffa553dbb658698367c7e19/sign/models/sign_item_type.py#L41

sentry-7378769090

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113091

**Issue**
In subcontracting, deleting a raw move line and adding a new one in the same editing flow can lead to a validation error during production recording.

**Steps to reproduce**
- Create a subcontracting product with a comp A
- Create and confirm a purchase order of that product (with the subcontracting partner)
- Open the associated delivery
- Open the move details (hamburger button)
- Delete the move line linked to the comp A
- Create a new move line for a comp B with a quantity of 1
- Record the production
-> A validation error occurs: the mandatory field `product_uom_id` is not set.

**Cause**
The regression comes from this commit: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/54f10b56f577ad9ed5575bd396dba7d20d22fc2e

While assigning `move_raw_ids`, the inverse method is triggered:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9267b2d1a9b2d2d6a33eceab07d572406c68c723/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/mrp_production.py#L34
At this stage, newly added lines are still virtual records (`line`):
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9267b2d1a9b2d2d6a33eceab07d572406c68c723/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/mrp_production.py#L38
The previous implementation directly unlinked removed move lines (see commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/54f10b56f577ad9ed5575bd396dba7d20d22fc2e):
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9267b2d1a9b2d2d6a33eceab07d572406c68c723/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/mrp_production.py#L40-L43
Which will eventually flush and invalidate all the cache:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0e78b4fd2ab904f2e12107cb6ff7cc11d512259f/odoo/models.py#L4666
And since `line` is a virtual record (not in db), its associated values will be reset, among those, `product_uom_id`.
Later, when the move line is reassigned:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0e78b4fd2ab904f2e12107cb6ff7cc11d512259f/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/mrp_production.py#L49
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0e78b4fd2ab904f2e12107cb6ff7cc11d512259f/odoo/models.py#L5223-L5228

the validation fails because the virtual line no longer contains the required values.

**Additional note**
An alternative could have been using Command but since this line:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0e78b4fd2ab904f2e12107cb6ff7cc11d512259f/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/mrp_production.py#L42
can not be converted to:
`Command.set([line.id for line in lines])`
because `lines` may also contain virtual records.
This causes an invalid quantity for the move. Indeed, even if the command operator would update the quantity
on the `move_line` correctly, it won't for the quantity of the `move` because of its associated compute method:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/26ba95ac1c5bbb24975efb1a6f53c1ab47b61532/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L399-L400
that relies on `.ids`, which is `[]` on virtual records.
Therefore, keep the change minimal.

opw-6133281

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263058

Configuration:
- Costing method: FIFO, automated valuation
- Multi-currency: PO in a foreign currency (e.g. EUR), company currency USD
- Two different exchange rates: one active at bill date, one at receipt date
- Bill posted before any goods are received

Steps to reproduce:
- Set EUR as a secondary currency with two different rates:
    - Rate 1 on January 1st:  1 EUR = 1 USD
    - Rate 2 on January 8th:  1 EUR = 2 USD
- Create a PO in EUR for 20 units @ 10,000 EUR
- Post the vendor bill dated January 3rd (rate 1 applies: 1 EUR = 1 USD)
- Receive 10 units on a date after January 8th and create a backorder
- Receive the remaining 10 units from the backorder on the same date
- Inspect the stock valuation layers and interim account journal entries for both receipts

Prior to this commit:
  The two receipts, identical in quantity, date, and PO price, would produce different unit costs in USD. The backorder receipt would be incorrectly valued due to a wrong exchange rate being used when computing `receipt_value` in `_get_price_unit()`.

Receipt 2 (backorder):
    SVL 1 value: $100,000 USD
    Converted to EUR at receipt date (1 USD = 0.5 EUR):
    receipt_value = $100,000 × 0.5 = 50,000 EUR (wrong rate)
    total_invoiced_value = 200,000 EUR
    remaining_value = 200,000 - 50,000 = 150,000 EUR 
    remaining_qty = 20 - 10 = 10
    price_unit = 150,000 / 10 = 15,000 EUR
    Converted to USD at bill date (1 EUR = 1 USD):
    price_unit = $15,000 USD
    SVL value = $15,000 × 10 = $150,000

  This bug only affects backorder receipts. The first receipt always gets `receipt_value = 0` (no prior SVLs exist), so the problematic conversion never runs.

After this commit:
  `receipt_value` is now computed using `_get_currency_convert_date()` instead of `layer.create_date`. This ensures `receipt_value` and `total_invoiced_value` are both expressed in EUR at the same reference rate.

Receipt 2 (backorder):
    SVL 1 value: $100,000 USD
    Converted to EUR at bill date (1 EUR = 1 USD):
    receipt_value = $100,000 × 1.0 = 100,000 EUR (correct rate)
    total_invoiced_value = 200,000 EUR
    remaining_value = 200,000 - 100,000 = 100,000 EUR
    remaining_qty = 20 - 10 = 10
    price_unit = 100,000 / 10 = 10,000 EUR
    Converted to USD at bill date (1 EUR = 1 USD):
    price_unit = $10,000 USD
    SVL value = $10,000 × 10 = $100,000 

  Both receipts now produce identical unit costs regardless of exchange rate differences between bill date and receipt date.

OPW: 5426718



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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267590
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262577

Starting version 2.1.4 of markupsafe, they decided to adapt the `striptags` function to use in-python-loops instead of the original implemenation that relied on pre-compiled regex.

A problem has been spotted with qweb templates that used `striptags` with large inputs, which led to the investigation of this function and it was found that the old implementation is actually faster. In fact, the PR introducing this change in Markupsafe, made these claims with no benchmarks whatsoever: https://github.com/pallets/markupsafe/pull/413/changes 

The new implementation of markupsafe is O(N x M), where n is the number of tags and M being the length of the input string. The old regex approach does a single c-level scan to check the existence of the regex which is performing much better for varying input size.

The benchmark cases below are in the form `<case_description>_<number_of_tags>`. We can see that in the cases where the current implementation is slightly faster is when there are no tags in the input which can be explained by the fact that the while loops will simply exit early. The time lost in the regex implementation is likely due to the deeper call stack to scan for the regex. Apart from that, in the case of an unclosed tag, the regex implementation is also slower because it still needs to scan the entire line. However, in that case the time taken is a handful of milliseconds, so it's not really a performance regression there either.

Apart from that, the old implementation is consistently much more performant, for both small and large inputs.

Benchmarks:

| Case                                      | Regex ms | Current ms | Speedup |
|----------------------------------------------|----------|------------|---------|
| plain_text_50k_words                         | 3.020    | 2.627      | 0.9x ← current_implementation |
| unclosed_tag_then_50kb_text                  | 0.367    | 0.032      | 0.1x ← current_implementation |
| unclosed_tag_then_500kb_text                 | 3.787    | 0.273      | 0.1x ← current_implementation |
| multiple_unclosed_open_tags_then_50kb_text   | 18.912   | 0.371      | 0.0x ← current_implementation |
| multiple_unclosed_open_tags_then_500kb_text  | 189.007  | 8.209      | 0.0x ← current_implementation |
| unclosed_comment_then_500kb_text             | 7.276    | 0.412      | 0.1x ← current_implementation |
| 5k_small_tags                                | 0.986    | 22.096     | 22.4x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 20k_small_tags                               | 4.125    | 492.186    | 119.3x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 50k_small_tags                               | 12.658   | 5499.602   | 434.5x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 1k_nested_divs                               | 0.155    | 0.923      | 5.9x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 10k_nested_divs                              | 1.648    | 48.410     | 29.4x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 2k_tags_with_attrs                           | 1.058    | 12.013     | 11.4x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 20k_tags_with_attrs                          | 13.185   | 6068.755   | 460.3x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 2k_multiline_tags                            | 0.815    | 10.819     | 13.3x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 20k_multiline_tags                           | 8.939    | 4231.768   | 473.4x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 1k_comments                                  | 0.222    | 1.292      | 5.8x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 1k_comments_hiding_tags                      | 0.163    | 1.121      | 6.9x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 2k_mixed                                     | 0.278    | 2.392      | 8.6x ← regex_old_implementation |
| 10k_mixed                                    | 1.400    | 50.959     | 36.4x ← regex_old_implementation |
| qweb_shop_200_products                       | 0.907    | 7.880      | 8.7x ← regex_old_implementation |
| qweb_shop_1000_products                      | 4.296    | 194.647    | 45.3x ← regex_old_implementation |


This PR is needed because requirements.txt in Odoo specifies the following dependency:
`MarkupSafe==2.1.5 ; python_version >= '3.12' \# (Noble)`

This means that all versions running Ubuntu Noble, will be having the same issue introduced in version 2.1.4 of markupsafe.

opw-5999688

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#258643
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257889

### Issue
Since the introduction of the Tax Returns feature in 18.3, it was no longer possible to generate a Closing Entry as the button has been replaced by Returns
The Return mechanism implies that you need a Return Type in order to make a Closing Entry using the Validate button

Additionally, using the Generic Tax Report by default creates a risk in Multi-VAT environments, as it mixes taxes from all countries instead of isolating Peruvian taxes

### Cause
The new 18.3 accounting workflow requires at least one active Return Type associated with a country-specific report variant to display the Return options and process the closing entry Peru was relying on the Generic Tax Report, without a dedicated report variant
No Return Type was configured, which blocked Odoo's automatic VAT closing workflow and prevented the system from prompting the user to configure the required closing accounts

### Steps to reproduce
- Install `l10n_pe_reports` and `accountant`
- Switch to a PE Company
- Go to the Tax Report

Before the fix, no Returns button is available for any of the existing reports, making it impossible to use Odoo's automatic process to configure the tax accounts and trigger the closing entry

### Notes
This is fixed by creating a dedicated Peruvian tax report variant directly in Enterprise that inherits from the generic tax report A custom handler is added to force the domain filtering on Peruvian taxes only, and a corresponding Return Type is defined to restore the full closing entry process safely

opw-5978673

### Issue before this commit:
When reversing an invoice in a Peruvian company, the "Cancel Reason" entered in the credit note window is not propagated to the Peruvian EDI tab of the resulting Credit Note. Only the Credit Reason is successfully reported.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_pe
2. Switch to PE company
3. Create an invoice and confirm it
4. Create a credit note for the invoice with a cancel reason and a credit reason and click the reverse button
5. See that in the Peruvian EDI tab only the Credit Reason is reported but not the Cancel Reason

### Cause of the issue:
In the l10n_pe_edi module, the override of the _prepare_default_reversal method maps the l10n_pe_edi_refund_reason to the new move's values, but completely omits the mapping of the wizard's textual reason field to the l10n_pe_edi_cancel_reason field of the resulting credit note.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
To ensure the generated credit notes contain all required information for the Peruvian EDI (SUNAT). Mapping the cancel reason guarantees that the electronic document accurately reflects both the refund code and the descriptive cancellation text provided by the user.

opw-6238525

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118479

Issue:
----------------------------------------
When in a negative timezone, the "Out of Office until..." text in discuss shows the day before.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Change the timezone of the user to "America/Toronto" for example
- Have an employee currently on leave until tomorrow
- Open discuss to chat with this employee
- The "Out of Office until..." shows today's date

Cause:
----------------------------------------
When calling `toLocaleString()` without a timezone specified in the options, the date is converted to local time (in the browser's timezone).

Here `persona.out_of_office_date_end` is just a date, `deserializeDateTime()` converts it to a timestamp, so the same day at 0am. Then if the timezone is negative, the timestamp becomes an hour the previous day when calling `toLocaleString()`. The format we give `DateTime.DATE_MED` doesn't include hours, so we just display the previous date.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
Add `timeZone:"UTC"` in the options to avoid the timezone conversion.

opw-6252040

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267677
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267479

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install eLearning app with gamification
- Go to Settings > Gamification Tools > Challenges
- Set a challenge with multiple participants (portals / internals)
- Set its state to Done
- Notification email is sent to every participants
- They can see each other in the mail header
(portal user can see all other portal users, internal user can see all portal users)

**Issue:**
Since [1] external recipients are added in the mail header, but this is not adequate for every flows
(here there is no need for the participants to be aware of each other).

**Fix:**
In [2] this issue was mitigated by removing the `'X-Msg-To-Add'` from the header for models which don't need it.
Then in [3] the solution was replaced by a more generic approach using `_CUSTOMER_HEADERS_LIMIT_COUNT = 0`.

[1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/42aaaef59d21558438c767c6dd8a21674e5df9df
[2] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/e6c13ce4436b3c8b3a2058d2ccf65a7da1b256b2
[3] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c4dbd868b9c7e26f11db4d2cacef7ffce6c87082

opw-6099745

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267192