In this commit:
------------------
- Maintain separate Fiskaly transaction flows for retail (short tx) and restaurant (long tx)
  orders as discussed with the Fiskaly team.
- `Initialize order transactions` with an empty payload when the `first product` is added.
- Start `receipt transactions` with an empty payload when the `first payment line` is added.
- For retail flows, no intermediate order updates are sent to Fiskaly before finalization.
- For restaurant flows, create additional transaction updates during kitchen synchronization.
  Ensure already synchronized products are not resent, and only newly added or updated
  quantities are included in the payload.
- `Finalize order and receipt transactions` with complete order lines and payment details
  when we validate the order.

task: 6208963

Reference:
<img width="1863" height="1285" alt="de_tss_flow" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9140788e-7948-4a08-9f11-27197b22ca8b" />

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120529
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117526

When checking if a stock.move.line can use a location as destination with the method `_check_can_be_used()`, we start by checking if the incoming products can be stored without exceeding the maximal weight of the location.

This needs to call the `_get_weight()` method to compute the forecasted weight for the location. This method relies on heavy computations and can become a bottleneck when we need to loop over a high number of locations.

In some cases, we can rule out the location based on less expensive conditions that are verified after the weight one.

We propose to invert the conditions check order to avoid computing the location weight when other conditions are not met.

Steps to reproduce
---------------

- Install stock and purchase modules;
- Enable storage locations and categories in the settings;
- Create a storage category: allow_new_product = same, max_weight=10.0 kg;
- Create N locations using this category, parent_id=WH/stock;
- Create a putaway rule to each location from WH/stock, for the new storage category and using a product A with a weight of 2 kg;
- Create a stock.quant per location to store a product B, weight=2kg;
- Create a purchase order with X lines for 1 unit of product A;
- Validate the purchase order.

The validation should take several seconds to execute
as every locations will be rejected due to the storage
category, but it will call _get_weight() first.

Benchmark
---------------

This improvement is very data specific and will be most useful when a lot of locations are using a storage category of type "empty" or "same".
In addition, it also relies on the order in which we are treating the locations, if the acceptable locations are the first to be received in the method, it won't need to loop over all of them.

The following benchmark was established in a production database in which every 6068 locations are using a category of type "same".

| No stock.move.lines | Before PR | After PR |
|---------------------|-----------|----------|
|                  40 |     168 s |   7.3  s |
|                  72 |     264 s |  12.33 s |

When the only condition that can reject locations is the exceeding weight, this modification will slow down the process. However, the time loss in this case is smaller than the gain in the first case.
The following benchmark was obtained by validating a purchase 1 line order with only fully filled locations.

| No locations | Before PR | After PR |
|--------------|-----------|----------|
|          500 |     2.02s |   2.37 s |
|         2000 |     7.85s |   9.76 s |
|        10000 |   39.16 s |  48.86 s |

opw-5949370

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270125
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266872

Steps:
- Install an Odoo 17.0 database with the Indian Payroll module and demo data.
- Upgrade the database to 18.0.

Issue:
- The Indian payroll demo data creates leave allocations and approves them through an XML function call.
- During a fresh installation, demo files are loaded in 'init' mode, so the approval function is executed and the allocations move from 'confirm' to 'validate'.
- However, during a 17.0 >>> 18.0 upgrade, demo files are loaded in 'update' mode. Odoo automatically loads demo files with 'noupdate=True' from the load_demo() >> load_data() function:
- This value is passed to the XML importer and becomes the default noupdate state for the file. Since the demo XML file does not explicitly override this value, the function tag uses 'noupdate=True'.
- When the XML parser reaches the approval function, _tag_function() skips its execution because of noupdate = 'True' and mode = 'update' condition.
- As a result, the approval function is not executed during the upgrade and the leave allocations remain in 'confirm' state. Subsequent demo payroll data expects validated allocations and fails during loading.

Fix:
- Explicitly set 'noupdate=0' on the demo XML file. This overrides the default 'noupdate=True' value applied to demo files, making the parser evaluate the section with 'noupdate=False'.
- As a result, '_tag_function()' executes the approval method during upgrades, the demo leave allocations are validated in both fresh/new db installations and 17.0 >>> 18.0 upgrade scenarios.

runbot error-https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/230430 

task-6268381

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119217

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

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

Issue:
Pickup addresses are always inactive, preventing the partner from receiving email confirmation

Solution:
Disable archiving of pickup addresses

opw-6095396

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265392
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263005

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
Fixes an issue where the sale order reference computation was fetching the invoice journal based on the logged-in user's current company instead of the company associated with the specific payment provider or transaction context. This caused incorrect reference processing or errors in multi-company environments when a user was logged into one company but processing an order from another.

Current behavior before PR:
The function searches for the account.journal using self.company_id.id. Since self in this context (likely a payment provider or transaction record) might be evaluated under the active user's environment context, it fetched the journal from the user's currently active company (allowed_company_ids), disregarding the actual company related to the sale order or the transaction.

Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The invoice journal search uses the correct company context (e.g., order.company_id.id or the specific company linked to the payment record), ensuring that the sale order reference is processed using the appropriate journal from the correct company, regardless of which company the logged-in user is currently switched into.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269558

Version:
----------
- 18.0+

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `stock` module
- Enable `Storage Locations` from Inventory settings
- Create a tracked storable product with on-hand 8 units in `Shelf 1`
- Create Delivery 1 for 5 units and click `Mark as To Do`
- Create Delivery 2 for 5 units and click `Mark as To Do`
- Verify reservations:
  - Delivery 1 reserves 5 units
  - Delivery 2 reserves remaining 3 units
- Relocate all 8 units from `Shelf 1` to `Shelf 2` using the `Relocate` action from `stock quant`
- Reopen both deliveries

Issue:
------
After relocating stock between internal locations, reservations are reassigned
in the wrong order:
- Delivery 2 becomes fully reserved with 5 units
- Delivery 1 is reduced to 3 reserved units

This incorrectly swaps the original reservation priority between deliveries.

Cause:
------
The relocation wizard starts from:
`stock.quant.relocate.action_relocate_quants()`
which calls `move_quants()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/wizard/stock_quant_relocate.py#L70

`move_quants()` validates an internal stock move through `_action_done()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L1572

During validation, `_synchronize_quant()` moves the stock quantity from
`Shelf 1` to `Shelf 2`.

However, the already reserved delivery move lines still reference `Shelf 1`.
This temporarily makes the source quant negative (`available_qty < 0`),
triggering `_free_reservation()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L695-L700

Inside `_free_reservation()`, move lines are ordered using
`current_picking_first`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L816-L821

Since both deliveries share the same scheduled date, the fallback ordering
uses `-cand.id`, causing Delivery 2 (higher id) to be processed before
Delivery 1 (lower id).

The reservation cleanup therefore happens in this order:
- Remove Delivery 2 reservation (3 qty)
- Remove Delivery 1 reservation (5 qty)

The corresponding moves are then added to `move_to_reassign`
in the same order:
`[Delivery 2, Delivery 1]`
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L849

Later, `move_to_reassign._action_assign()` processes the moves in recordset
order:
- Delivery 2 reserves 5 units first
- Delivery 1 only gets the remaining 3 units

As a result, reservation priority is unintentionally reversed after relocation.

Fix:
----
Before calling `_action_assign()`, reverse `move_to_reassign` 

This ensures reassignment preserves the original reservation order:
- Delivery 1 is reassigned first and recovers 5 units
- Delivery 2 receives the remaining 3 units

The reservation state therefore remains consistent before and after
internal stock relocation.

---

opw-6218256

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270061
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265169

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120065
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118813

Summary
=======

`_check_if_used_in_website_form`, the ondelete hook on
`ir.model.fields` that guards against deleting a field referenced by
a website form, performs poorly on realistic databases. It can take
multiple minutes to validate a single field deletion, blocking user
actions such as removing a Studio field.

This commit restricts the scan to columns that can actually contain
website form markup, bringing the hook from multi-minute to
sub-second without any loss of coverage.

The Problem
===========

Deleting any `ir.model.fields` record triggers this validation hook,
which must ensure the field is not referenced inside any website
form. The implementation iterates every stored HTML column returned
by `website._get_html_fields()` and runs one case-insensitive
`ILIKE '%data-model_name="<model>"%'` search per column against
`<model>.<html_field>`, then parses each match with `lxml` and
validates it with XPath.

Two root issues cause the multi-minute cost:

- **Unbounded scan surface**: all stored HTML columns are scanned
  (~95 on realistic databases), even though the vast majority of them
  declare `sanitize=True` and `sanitize_form=True` (the defaults).
  When both flags are True, `<form>` tags are stripped on write and
  the column can never physically contain website form markup.
- **Per-column `ILIKE` cost**: `ILIKE` on large TEXT/JSONB columns
  performs a sequential scan. A single large HTML column is enough
  to make the hook run for several minutes on its own.

Improvements
============

- Scan only columns that can actually contain forms:
  - `ir.ui.view.arch_db` , primary target; all website forms are
    stored there.
  - HTML fields whose sanitization either is disabled
    (`sanitize=False`, e.g. `blog.post.content`,
    `website.custom_code_head`) or explicitly allows forms
    (`sanitize_form=False`, e.g.
    `product.template.website_description`, `hr.job.description`,
    `event.event.description`). Any other HTML field strips `<form>`
    on write and will never contain a form.
- Batch searches: group the deleted fields by model once and emit a
  single `OR`-domain search per candidate column, instead of one
  search per (field, column) pair.
- Parse each returned record with `lxml` and validate with XPath
  directly. The `ILIKE` domain already filters out non-matching rows
  DB-side.

Benchmarks
==========

Profiled on a database containing ~95 stored HTML columns and ~5.2k
views. The hook was invoked read-only via
`field._check_if_used_in_website_form()` on a custom field.

| Metric                         |     Before |      After |
| :----------------------------- | ---------: | ---------: |
| Hook wall time                 |     ~444 s |    ~173 ms |
| HTML columns scanned           |         95 |          5 |
| SQL queries issued             |         96 |          6 |

Key results:

- Hook wall time reduced from multi-minute to sub-second
  (~2,570× faster on the profiled database).
- Scan surface reduced from ~95 columns to a handful (1 +
  the form-capable HTML fields installed on the database, typically
  under 10).

opw-6086536

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268666
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259846

In this commit:
------------------
- Maintain separate Fiskaly transaction flows for retail (short tx) and restaurant (long tx)
  orders as discussed with the Fiskaly team.
- `Initialize order transactions` with an empty payload when the `first product` is added.
- Start `receipt transactions` with an empty payload when the `first payment line` is added.
- For retail flows, no intermediate order updates are sent to Fiskaly before finalization.
- For restaurant flows, create additional transaction updates during kitchen synchronization.
  Ensure already synchronized products are not resent, and only newly added or updated
  quantities are included in the payload.
- `Finalize order and receipt transactions` with complete order lines and payment details
  when we validate the order.

task: 6208963

Reference:
<img width="1863" height="1285" alt="de_tss_flow" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9140788e-7948-4a08-9f11-27197b22ca8b" />

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120218
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117526

Version:
----------
- 18.0+

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `stock` module
- Enable `Storage Locations` from Inventory settings
- Create a tracked storable product with on-hand 8 units in `Shelf 1`
- Create Delivery 1 for 5 units and click `Mark as To Do`
- Create Delivery 2 for 5 units and click `Mark as To Do`
- Verify reservations:
  - Delivery 1 reserves 5 units
  - Delivery 2 reserves remaining 3 units
- Relocate all 8 units from `Shelf 1` to `Shelf 2` using the `Relocate` action from `stock quant`
- Reopen both deliveries

Issue:
------
After relocating stock between internal locations, reservations are reassigned
in the wrong order:
- Delivery 2 becomes fully reserved with 5 units
- Delivery 1 is reduced to 3 reserved units

This incorrectly swaps the original reservation priority between deliveries.

Cause:
------
The relocation wizard starts from:
`stock.quant.relocate.action_relocate_quants()`
which calls `move_quants()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/wizard/stock_quant_relocate.py#L70

`move_quants()` validates an internal stock move through `_action_done()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L1572

During validation, `_synchronize_quant()` moves the stock quantity from
`Shelf 1` to `Shelf 2`.

However, the already reserved delivery move lines still reference `Shelf 1`.
This temporarily makes the source quant negative (`available_qty < 0`),
triggering `_free_reservation()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L695-L700

Inside `_free_reservation()`, move lines are ordered using
`current_picking_first`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L816-L821

Since both deliveries share the same scheduled date, the fallback ordering
uses `-cand.id`, causing Delivery 2 (higher id) to be processed before
Delivery 1 (lower id).

The reservation cleanup therefore happens in this order:
- Remove Delivery 2 reservation (3 qty)
- Remove Delivery 1 reservation (5 qty)

The corresponding moves are then added to `move_to_reassign`
in the same order:
`[Delivery 2, Delivery 1]`
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d3eebbd1c27e8a039bb55cdf2a82d464e06ffa8c/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L849

Later, `move_to_reassign._action_assign()` processes the moves in recordset
order:
- Delivery 2 reserves 5 units first
- Delivery 1 only gets the remaining 3 units

As a result, reservation priority is unintentionally reversed after relocation.

Fix:
----
Before calling `_action_assign()`, reverse `move_to_reassign` 

This ensures reassignment preserves the original reservation order:
- Delivery 1 is reassigned first and recovers 5 units
- Delivery 2 receives the remaining 3 units

The reservation state therefore remains consistent before and after
internal stock relocation.

---

opw-6218256

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269973
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265169

When checking if a stock.move.line can use a location as destination with the method `_check_can_be_used()`, we start by checking if the incoming products can be stored without exceeding the maximal weight of the location.

This needs to call the `_get_weight()` method to compute the forecasted weight for the location. This method relies on heavy computations and can become a bottleneck when we need to loop over a high number of locations.

In some cases, we can rule out the location based on less expensive conditions that are verified after the weight one.

We propose to invert the conditions check order to avoid computing the location weight when other conditions are not met.

Steps to reproduce
---------------

- Install stock and purchase modules;
- Enable storage locations and categories in the settings;
- Create a storage category: allow_new_product = same, max_weight=10.0 kg;
- Create N locations using this category, parent_id=WH/stock;
- Create a putaway rule to each location from WH/stock, for the new storage category and using a product A with a weight of 2 kg;
- Create a stock.quant per location to store a product B, weight=2kg;
- Create a purchase order with X lines for 1 unit of product A;
- Validate the purchase order.

The validation should take several seconds to execute
as every locations will be rejected due to the storage
category, but it will call _get_weight() first.

Benchmark
---------------

This improvement is very data specific and will be most useful when a lot of locations are using a storage category of type "empty" or "same".
In addition, it also relies on the order in which we are treating the locations, if the acceptable locations are the first to be received in the method, it won't need to loop over all of them.

The following benchmark was established in a production database in which every 6068 locations are using a category of type "same".

| No stock.move.lines | Before PR | After PR |
|---------------------|-----------|----------|
|                  40 |     168 s |   7.3  s |
|                  72 |     264 s |  12.33 s |

When the only condition that can reject locations is the exceeding weight, this modification will slow down the process. However, the time loss in this case is smaller than the gain in the first case.
The following benchmark was obtained by validating a purchase 1 line order with only fully filled locations.

| No locations | Before PR | After PR |
|--------------|-----------|----------|
|          500 |     2.02s |   2.37 s |
|         2000 |     7.85s |   9.76 s |
|        10000 |   39.16 s |  48.86 s |

opw-5949370

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270125
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266872

*= test_l10n_us_hr_payroll_account

The employer matching cap for pre-retirement plans (401KMATCHING) evaluates to zero for hourly wage employees if wage is set to zero.

### **Steps to Reproduce:**
1) Install l10n_us_hr_payroll.
2) Create an employee with an hourly wage and set the fixed wage to 0. 
3) Configure the retirement plan parameters as follows:
  - 401(k) = 3%
  - Matching Amount = 100%
  - Matching Yearly Cap = 100% 
4) Generate a payslip for this employee and compute the sheet.

### **Observed Behavior:**
The "Benefits Matching to Retirement Plans" line computes as zero for the hourly employee.

### **Expected Behavior:**
The employer matching contribution should dynamically scale based on the actual gross pay period earnings instead of evaluating to zero.

### **Root Cause:**
The calculation of `partial_cap` uses `version.wage` directly at [1]. For hourly employees, the fixed 'wage' field defaults to zero, causing the entire multiplication to cancel out.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4c540f450d4de8b59b871662123f85ed54cca2a9/l10n_us_hr_payroll/data/hr_salary_rule_data.xml#L167

### **Fix:**
This commit computes the retirement matching eligibility cap from
`gross annualized wages` and applies the employer matching percentage on
the eligible contribution amount. This ensures retirement matching is
calculated consistently regardless of the employee's contract type.

**opw-6181024**

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120483
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119370

Summary
=======

`_check_if_used_in_website_form`, the ondelete hook on
`ir.model.fields` that guards against deleting a field referenced by
a website form, performs poorly on realistic databases. It can take
multiple minutes to validate a single field deletion, blocking user
actions such as removing a Studio field.

This commit restricts the scan to columns that can actually contain
website form markup, bringing the hook from multi-minute to
sub-second without any loss of coverage.

The Problem
===========

Deleting any `ir.model.fields` record triggers this validation hook,
which must ensure the field is not referenced inside any website
form. The implementation iterates every stored HTML column returned
by `website._get_html_fields()` and runs one case-insensitive
`ILIKE '%data-model_name="<model>"%'` search per column against
`<model>.<html_field>`, then parses each match with `lxml` and
validates it with XPath.

Two root issues cause the multi-minute cost:

- **Unbounded scan surface**: all stored HTML columns are scanned
  (~95 on realistic databases), even though the vast majority of them
  declare `sanitize=True` and `sanitize_form=True` (the defaults).
  When both flags are True, `<form>` tags are stripped on write and
  the column can never physically contain website form markup.
- **Per-column `ILIKE` cost**: `ILIKE` on large TEXT/JSONB columns
  performs a sequential scan. A single large HTML column is enough
  to make the hook run for several minutes on its own.

Improvements
============

- Scan only columns that can actually contain forms:
  - `ir.ui.view.arch_db` , primary target; all website forms are
    stored there.
  - HTML fields whose sanitization either is disabled
    (`sanitize=False`, e.g. `blog.post.content`,
    `website.custom_code_head`) or explicitly allows forms
    (`sanitize_form=False`, e.g.
    `product.template.website_description`, `hr.job.description`,
    `event.event.description`). Any other HTML field strips `<form>`
    on write and will never contain a form.
- Batch searches: group the deleted fields by model once and emit a
  single `OR`-domain search per candidate column, instead of one
  search per (field, column) pair.
- Parse each returned record with `lxml` and validate with XPath
  directly. The `ILIKE` domain already filters out non-matching rows
  DB-side.

Benchmarks
==========

Profiled on a database containing ~95 stored HTML columns and ~5.2k
views. The hook was invoked read-only via
`field._check_if_used_in_website_form()` on a custom field.

| Metric                         |     Before |      After |
| :----------------------------- | ---------: | ---------: |
| Hook wall time                 |     ~444 s |    ~173 ms |
| HTML columns scanned           |         95 |          5 |
| SQL queries issued             |         96 |          6 |

Key results:

- Hook wall time reduced from multi-minute to sub-second
  (~2,570× faster on the profiled database).
- Scan surface reduced from ~95 columns to a handful (1 +
  the form-capable HTML fields installed on the database, typically
  under 10).

opw-6086536

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268666
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259846

**Steps to reproduce on a new db:**
(bug also reproducable on runbot but the impact 
is less easy to compute because of influence of other
existing companies)

- create a new company as company 2 and use the existing 
default company as company 1.
- create a warehouse for both company
- for both comp, in settings for the 'fiscal localization' set 
Package : Generic Chart of account, if not already set
(to have account journals).
- for both comp, in settings for inventory valuation set 
'periodic' and for periodic valuation set 'daily'

From company 1 : 
- create a storable product with standard price method and 
set a cost of 30
- set an onhand quantity of 1
if you navigate to 'inventory valuation' you'll see that : 
  - initial balance is 0
  - ending stock is 30 
  - the variation lines have a balance of 30
  - all of this is expected

From company 2 :
- change the cost of the product to 10
- set an onhand quantity of 1
if you navigate to 'inventory valuation' you'll see that : 
  - initial balance is 0
  - ending stock is 10 
  - the variation lines have a balance of 10
  - all of this is expected
 
From any company :
- navigate to 'scheduled actions' and select the action 
'Stock Account: Inventory Valuation Closing'
- click on 'Run Manually'
- navigate to 'inventory valuation'

**Current behavior:**
with company 1 selected :
  - the initial balance is now 30 
  - ending stock still 30
  - no variation lines
  - the initial balance was correctly increased by the closing entry

with company 2 selected: 
  - the initial balance is now 40
  - the ending stock is still 10
  - the variation lines credit 30 in stock valuation

In company 2 the closing entry debitted 40 in stock valuation 
instead of 10 which increased the initial balance to 40 instead of 10

If you open the journal items you'll find the closing amls have a 
balance of 40 instead of 10

**Cause of the issue:**
The _cron_post_stock_valuation() method 
calls action_close_stock_valuation() on both companies
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L143-L144

This methods calls _action_close_stock_valuation
with a context modified with only self.env.company.ids
in 'allowed_company_ids'
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L56

This is needed because inside stock_value() we use 
the total value of the product 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L92
which will be the sum of the values of the product 
for each company inside allowed_company_id
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L274
So in case action_close_stock_valuation() was called from 
the 'generate entry' button from the inventory valuation view
we need only the main company selected to be in the
'allowed_company_ids' so that the inventory value is computed 
based only on this company (as is the accounting value).

The problem is that this does not work when calling the 
method from _cron_post_stock_valuation because then
there is no 'allowed_company_ids' in the context (because it was
called from _process_job() with a new env).
so self.env.company will be the company of the user 
which will be company 1.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/odoo/orm/environments.py#L243

Therefore when _action_close_stock_valuation will be 
called on company 2, in the context, allowed_company_ids 
will be company 1. Then, when computing 'products', with_company() 
will add self (company 2) to the context.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L151-L152
So stock_value will return the sum of the total_value 
of each product for company 1 and company 2 which is 40 (instead 
of 10 for just company 2)
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L242

We then create the closing accounting entry to match the 
accounting value with the stock value, which explains why 
the new initial accounting balance of company 2 is 40.

**fix:**
We set the context using self instead of self.env.companies
This makes more sense as both in the cron use case and 
the generate entry use case the stock value we want is the 
one of the company in self. 
- In cron use case, it's obvious as the method is called 
in a for loop on each company
- In the generate entry use case, self will also be the main 
company, because it's called, in actionGenerateEntry, 
on this.companyId 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/static/src/stock_valuation/controller.js#L75
which is computed based on the get_report_values
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/static/src/stock_valuation/controller.js#L21
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/static/src/stock_valuation/controller.js#L28-L30
Which returns the main company
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/report/stock_valuation_report.py#L29


Most importantly, this is also aligned with how the accounting 
values are computed.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/616e82d7b3a53b1facf481e783baed3e99393d3c/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L103-L105


opw-6237402

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269152
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266932

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

The `Product Reference Price` feature in `website_sale` cannot correctly handle products sold in large packs when the reference quantity requires a very small `base_unit_count`.

For example, a product sold as a `box of 10000` screws should be able to use `0.0001` as its `Base Unit Count`, so the reference price can be computed against the box quantity correctly.

**Current behavior before PR:**

`base_unit_count` uses the default float precision, so values with more than two decimal places are rounded in the product form.

When trying to set `Base Unit Count` to `0.0001`, the value is rounded to `0.00` / `0.01`, which makes the Product Reference Price computation incorrect.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Go to Settings > Website and enable Product Reference Price.
2. Create or open a product named `Screws`.
3. Set Sales Price to `$ 1.00`.
4. On the product form, set Base Unit Count to `0.0001`.
5. In Custom Unit of Measure, type `box of 10000` and press Create.


<img width="1374" height="740" alt="1" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2d4f7863-b2cd-4c7c-87e1-11526dc50551" />

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

`base_unit_count` keeps high-precision values such as `0.0001`.

This allows `Product Reference Price` to correctly support large-pack scenarios, such as selling screws in a `box of 10000`, by storing `base_unit_count` with unlimited numeric precision.


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262579

**Description**
Opening the Budget Report from any budget record times out on databases
with significant data volume. The request to
`budget.report/formatted_read_grouping_sets` consistently times out,
making the Budget Report completely unusable.

**Root cause:**
`budget.report` is an SQL view that consists of 5 UNION ALL branches.
When the list view loads, the ORM translates the `budget_analytic_id`
domain into a WHERE clause on the outer query wrapping the full UNION
ALL subquery. PostgreSQL cannot push this filter through a UNION ALL as
it's a hard optimization barrier. It must fully materialize the subquery
regardless of which budget is being viewed.

**Fix:**
Override _search on budget.report to extract budget_analytic_id and
budget_line_id conditions from the incoming domain using the Domain API.
budget_line_id is rewritten as Domain('id', op, value) so _to_sql()
correctly emits bl.id in the raw SQL. The resulting domain is injected
in context under budget_line_domain and read in _get_bl_query,
_get_aal_query (base module), and _get_pol_query (purchase module) to
filter budget_line rows inside each branch's LEFT JOIN ON clause.
This also removes the budget_report_budget_line_ids context key from
budget_line._compute_all, unifying both filters under one mechanism.

---

On customer DB (568k `account_analytic_line`, 27k `budget_line`,
116k confirmed `purchase_order_line`, 114k posted vendor bill lines
with purchase link):

| Budget | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| 8 lines, 730d span | timeout | 2.27s |
| 14 lines | timeout | 2.39s |
| 14 lines, 1095d span | timeout | 1.63s |

- Before: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/ehed5eb8de251426
- After: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/db8aef35cag9hg6f

opw-6098047

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119728
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114692

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120065
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118813

Steps to reproduce:
--------------------------------------------
1. Install `website_project` module
2. Create a new project
3. Add a customer to the project
4. Go to customer > add email and phone
5. Create a new task in that project:
    * Observe that the customer is the same as the project
6. Go to Website > Contact Us > Edit > Click on submit button
7. Set action to 'Create a Task' and select the created project in 'Project'
8. Click on Save and Open the URL in Incognito Mode
9. Go to the Contact Us page > Fill in the details > Submit
10. Comeback to our window and open tasks of the created project

Observation:
--------------------------------------------
1. A new task is created using the customer details entered in the form.
2. The existing task’s customer and the project’s customer are also incorrectly updated to this new customer.

Issue:
--------------------------------------------
The bug is in the `extract_data` method of the website form controller for projects.
A non-logged-in user submits the Contact Us form with name and an email that doesn't match any existing partner. The old code's `else` branch would set `partner_name` in the task record values without setting a `partner_id` https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cd080047578b9992811608a5af73a982a414da39/addons/website_project/controllers/main.py#L65-L66

During task creation, the computed field `_compute_partner_id` automatically sets `partner_id` to the project's partner
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cd080047578b9992811608a5af73a982a414da39/addons/project/models/project_task.py#L1440-L1441

`partner_name` is defined as
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cd080047578b9992811608a5af73a982a414da39/addons/website_project/models/project_task.py#L12

In Odoo, a related field is essentially a shortcut to a field on a linked record The key attribute here is `readonly=False`. This tells Odoo:
    * On read: Get the value from `self.partner_id.name`
    * On write: Propagate the write back to `self.partner_id.name` (this is the inverse). So writing `task.partner_name = 'TEST'` is equivalent to writing `task.partner_id.name = 'TEST'`. It modifies the partner record itself, not just the task.

So, the partner record itself was renamed. Every record that references a partner now sees the new name

Solution:
--------------------------------------------
The fix passes `False` to `partner_id`, this way:
    * The existing partner is untouched
    * All other tasks and the sales order keep their correct customer

opw-6206080

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264738

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119754
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118813

**Description**
Opening the Budget Report from any budget record times out on databases
with significant data volume. The request to
`budget.report/formatted_read_grouping_sets` consistently times out,
making the Budget Report completely unusable.

**Root cause:**
`budget.report` is an SQL view that consists of 5 UNION ALL branches.
When the list view loads, the ORM translates the `budget_analytic_id`
domain into a WHERE clause on the outer query wrapping the full UNION
ALL subquery. PostgreSQL cannot push this filter through a UNION ALL as
it's a hard optimization barrier. It must fully materialize the subquery
regardless of which budget is being viewed.

**Fix:**
Override _search on budget.report to extract budget_analytic_id and
budget_line_id conditions from the incoming domain using the Domain API.
budget_line_id is rewritten as Domain('id', op, value) so _to_sql()
correctly emits bl.id in the raw SQL. The resulting domain is injected
in context under budget_line_domain and read in _get_bl_query,
_get_aal_query (base module), and _get_pol_query (purchase module) to
filter budget_line rows inside each branch's LEFT JOIN ON clause.
This also removes the budget_report_budget_line_ids context key from
budget_line._compute_all, unifying both filters under one mechanism.

---

On customer DB (568k `account_analytic_line`, 27k `budget_line`,
116k confirmed `purchase_order_line`, 114k posted vendor bill lines
with purchase link):

| Budget | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| 8 lines, 730d span | timeout | 2.27s |
| 14 lines | timeout | 2.39s |
| 14 lines, 1095d span | timeout | 1.63s |

- Before: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/ehed5eb8de251426
- After: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/db8aef35cag9hg6f

opw-6098047

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114692

When checking if a stock.move.line can use a location as destination with the method `_check_can_be_used()`, we start by checking if the incoming products can be stored without exceeding the maximal weight of the location.

This needs to call the `_get_weight()` method to compute the forecasted weight for the location. This method relies on heavy computations and can become a bottleneck when we need to loop over a high number of locations.

In some cases, we can rule out the location based on less expensive conditions that are verified after the weight one.

We propose to invert the conditions check order to avoid computing the location weight when other conditions are not met.

Steps to reproduce
---------------

- Install stock and purchase modules;
- Enable storage locations and categories in the settings;
- Create a storage category: allow_new_product = same, max_weight=10.0 kg;
- Create N locations using this category, parent_id=WH/stock;
- Create a putaway rule to each location from WH/stock, for the new storage category and using a product A with a weight of 2 kg;
- Create a stock.quant per location to store a product B, weight=2kg;
- Create a purchase order with X lines for 1 unit of product A;
- Validate the purchase order.

The validation should take several seconds to execute
as every locations will be rejected due to the storage
category, but it will call _get_weight() first.

Benchmark
---------------

This improvement is very data specific and will be most useful when a lot of locations are using a storage category of type "empty" or "same".
In addition, it also relies on the order in which we are treating the locations, if the acceptable locations are the first to be received in the method, it won't need to loop over all of them.

The following benchmark was established in a production database in which every 6068 locations are using a category of type "same".

| No stock.move.lines | Before PR | After PR |
|---------------------|-----------|----------|
|                  40 |     168 s |   7.3  s |
|                  72 |     264 s |  12.33 s |

When the only condition that can reject locations is the exceeding weight, this modification will slow down the process. However, the time loss in this case is smaller than the gain in the first case.
The following benchmark was obtained by validating a purchase 1 line order with only fully filled locations.

| No locations | Before PR | After PR |
|--------------|-----------|----------|
|          500 |     2.02s |   2.37 s |
|         2000 |     7.85s |   9.76 s |
|        10000 |   39.16 s |  48.86 s |

opw-5949370

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270125
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266872

*=l10n_ch_hr_payroll,hr_payroll_account_iso20022

When clicking the create payment report button on a payslip for a Swiss company,
a traceback occurs if the ``hr_payroll_account_iso20022`` module is not installed.

Steps to reproduce the error:
- Install ``l10n_ch_hr_payroll`` module
- Switch to CH Company
- Create an Employee and running contract for it
- Go to Payroll > Payslip > All payslips > Create a new payslip > Set the employee > Confirm > Create payment report

Traceback:
```py
ValueError: Wrong value for hr.payroll.payment.report.wizard.export_format: 'iso20022_ch'
```

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7792926504a823590fbbe574a96994002a92fc17/l10n_ch_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L383 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7792926504a823590fbbe574a96994002a92fc17/l10n_ch_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip_run.py#L13
Here, ``iso20022_ch`` is passed as ``export_format``,
However, ``iso20022_ch`` is added to the selection field in the ``hr_payroll_account_iso20022`` module at [1].
When that module is not installed, the selection value does not exist, leading to the above error.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7792926504a823590fbbe574a96994002a92fc17/hr_payroll_account_iso20022/wizard/hr_payroll_payment_report_wizard.py#L11

sentry-7391832811

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120295
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113277

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

The `Product Reference Price` feature in `website_sale` cannot correctly handle products sold in large packs when the reference quantity requires a very small `base_unit_count`.

For example, a product sold as a `box of 10000` screws should be able to use `0.0001` as its `Base Unit Count`, so the reference price can be computed against the box quantity correctly.

**Current behavior before PR:**

`base_unit_count` uses the default float precision, so values with more than two decimal places are rounded in the product form.

When trying to set `Base Unit Count` to `0.0001`, the value is rounded to `0.00` / `0.01`, which makes the Product Reference Price computation incorrect.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Go to Settings > Website and enable Product Reference Price.
2. Create or open a product named `Screws`.
3. Set Sales Price to `$ 1.00`.
4. On the product form, set Base Unit Count to `0.0001`.
5. In Custom Unit of Measure, type `box of 10000` and press Create.


<img width="1374" height="740" alt="1" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2d4f7863-b2cd-4c7c-87e1-11526dc50551" />

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

`base_unit_count` keeps high-precision values such as `0.0001`.

This allows `Product Reference Price` to correctly support large-pack scenarios, such as selling screws in a `box of 10000`, by storing `base_unit_count` with unlimited numeric precision.


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262579

Steps to reproduce
1. Set warehouse to 2-step incoming (Input → Stock)
2. Enable "Propagation of carrier" on the push rule (Input → Stock)
3. On the vendor, set "Purchase Orders Grouping" to "Always"
4. Create a storable product with the Buy route and that vendor
5. Create two sale orders for that product, each with a different delivery carrier
6. Confirm both sale orders → a single merged purchase order is created
7. Confirm the purchase order → a receipt (Vendors → Input) is created
8. Validate the receipt → ValueError: Expected singleton: delivery.carrier(1, 3)

Issue
In `_get_new_picking_values`, when the push rule fires to create the internal transfer (Input → Stock), the carrier is fetched from the referenced sale orders: carrier_id = self.reference_ids.sale_ids.carrier_id.id https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5fb0c1f1460949043aa23ddbed09bdbfdc4a8482/addons/stock_delivery/models/stock_move.py#L45

Because both sale orders share the same merged receipt, the receipt move references both. When those SOs have different carriers, `self.reference_ids.sale_ids.carrier_id` returns a multi-record recordset and calling `.id` raises `ValueError: Expected singleton: delivery.carrier(1, 3)`.

opw-6126760

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262671

When a Time Off Type is created, it inherits the country of the current company. If there are leaves or allocations created from this Time Off Type and the company's country is then changed, various parts of Time Off will throw access errors as the leaves and allocations are still tied to the former country. The goal of this PR is to constrain
the company country from being changed unless there are no such leaves or allocations.

**Steps to Reproduce on Runbot:**
1. Ensure the current company has a `country` set, e.g. "My Company (San Fransisco)" has country set to "United States". 
2. Access Time Off as Mitchell Admin.
3. Create a new Time Off Type, for simplicity's sake without a need for allocation or approval, ex: "Gone Fishing". Note this Time Off Type will have the `country` set to the company country by default. 
4. Take "Gone Fishing" time off. 
5. Change or set blank the company's `country` value. 
6. Ensure the record rules cache is flushed.
7. Try to access Time Off. 

opw-6206359, opw-6140496

closes #263950

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263950

Steps to reproduce:
--------------------------
1. Install l10n_ch_hr_payroll_elm_transmission.
2. Switch to a Swiss company.
3. Create an employee and create a user with HR rights but without Payroll rights.
4. Log in with this new user.
5. Update any value on the employee form (e.g., marital status or add a tag).

Issue:
-----------
Updating the employee raises the following error:
```python
You do not have enough rights to access the fields "slip_ids" on Employee (hr.employee). Please contact your system administrator.

Operation: read
User: 2
Fields:
- slip_ids (allowed for groups 'Payroll / Officer: Manage all contracts')
```

Cause:
---------
After this 4416eda, open payslips are recomputed automatically on every employee update:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8f7a43eebdc8f7f46f9d61ab7084e036c20f778e/l10n_ch_hr_payroll_elm_transmission/models/hr_employee.py#L210-L213
`slip_ids` is restricted to payroll users:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8f7a43eebdc8f7f46f9d61ab7084e036c20f778e/hr_payroll/models/hr_employee.py#L14 As a result, when an HR user without payroll rights updates an employee,
accessing slip_ids raises an **AccessError**.

Solution:
-----------
Use sudo() when accessing slip_ids so HR users can update employee records 
without issue.

**NOTE:**
The issue has been resolved from version saas~18.4 with the following commits:
279f09a9587674c035c514f966788a4dddfe9794 and  75d66d8

opw-6210358

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120019
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117387

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Enable "Track orders edits" in the settings
- Enable "Log in with Employees"
- Go to the Restaurant, log in with employee A
- Go to a table, order 3 Sushis
- Go back to the floor plan and change to employee B
- Go back to the table and change the qty of 3 Sushis to 2 Sushis
- Go to the order in the backend and check the chatter
- It will indicate that employee A did the change, but it was employee B

**Why the fix:**

We always used the cashier set on the order to determine who should be put in the chatter, regardless of who is actually connected at that point.

We now use the session's current employee to write who did the change in the chatter.

We do not change the order's employee, because it will be done once the order has been paid.

In the case where we are not logged in but pos_hr is installed, the employee_id might be the id of a res.user, and
browsing it might return the wrong value. To avoid this, we check if the value exists as a hr.employee before assigning the name.

The way we return the value has been changed because the linter wasn't happy about it.

opw-6213504

### Steps to reproduce:

- Enable rental transfer
- Create a rentable product R
- Create and confirm a rental order for 1 unit of R
- Create a kit bom for R: 1 x COMP
- Validate the delivery of your unit of R
#### > Missing Error: Record does not exist or has been deleted.

### Cause of the issue:

Confirming your rental order will generate a confirm moves of R. However, since at this point the product was not a kit, these will not be exploded. Now, the issue is that at validation The move will be exploded and deleted in the super call:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_mrp_renting/models/stock_move.py#L10-L13 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f2f222a431627a672daf10c86ec2578a27f97bb/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L550-L555 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f2f222a431627a672daf10c86ec2578a27f97bb/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L591-L593 However, since the overrides of the sale_{mrp,stock}_renting modules call self rather than the result of the super call, they still expect to work with the original move rather than its exploded result: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_mrp_renting/models/stock_move.py#L10-L13 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_stock_renting/models/stock_move.py#L61-L65

opw-6191841

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120051

### Steps to reproduce:

- Enable rental transfer
- Create a rentable product R
- Create and confirm a rental order for 1 unit of R
- Create a kit bom for R: 1 x COMP
- Validate the delivery of your unit of R
#### > Missing Error: Record does not exist or has been deleted.

### Cause of the issue:

Confirming your rental order will generate a confirm moves of R. However, since at this point the product was not a kit, these will not be exploded. Now, the issue is that at validation The move will be exploded and deleted in the super call:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_mrp_renting/models/stock_move.py#L10-L13 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f2f222a431627a672daf10c86ec2578a27f97bb/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L550-L555 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f2f222a431627a672daf10c86ec2578a27f97bb/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L591-L593 However, since the overrides of the sale_{mrp,stock}_renting modules call self rather than the result of the super call, they still expect to work with the original move rather than its exploded result: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_mrp_renting/models/stock_move.py#L10-L13 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/sale_stock_renting/models/stock_move.py#L61-L65

opw-6191841

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120051

Follow-up of:
- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/119827
- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/120380

---

This PR review the overall frontdesk design to improve responsiveness and consistency across views.

task-6022341

| master | this PR |
|--------|--------|
| <img width="1021" height="765" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d981f222-e3ce-42ae-9846-8eb05378fb46" /> | <img width="1022" height="769" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4c49206b-3022-40bc-9ce6-e8e374156c6d" /> |
| <img width="1025" height="767" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1b929595-c8fb-4863-9c02-2c4d8cd00376" /> | <img width="1023" height="766" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/750b4423-be14-4974-bdde-4a8e332e6f29" /> |
| <img width="1020" height="764" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/45cdad54-0654-4d86-a844-4b004400bab9" /> | <img width="1017" height="758" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c848e800-5b4f-4a70-a718-d1d6d48ae411" /> |

### Steps to reproduce:

1. Create a product tracked by lot
2. Put 10 units in WH/Stock without lot
3. Inventory > Operations > Adjustments > Physical Inventory
4. Select the line referring to your product and request an inventory count + Show Expected Quantity
5. Open the barcode app > Count Inventory
6. Scan your product
#### > The line is not selected, in particular, next scans will be re-interpreted as product scans rather than new serial creation for your product.

### Cause of the issue:

Scanning your product search a line to select if any: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/bce04ce24b66fb1a2481274eb3aebdc30a62766e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1432-L1435 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/bce04ce24b66fb1a2481274eb3aebdc30a62766e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1630-L1632
However, the `findLine` will fail since this method calls the `_canOverrideTrackingNumber` to determine if the lot of the barcodData matches the one of the line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/bce04ce24b66fb1a2481274eb3aebdc30a62766e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1859-L1863
But, the override of the `_canOverrideTrackingNumber` method for the `BarcodeQuantModel` does not handle the absence of lotName in the barcodeData correctly as it does not consider that a line without lot can be overridden by an empty lotName:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/bce04ce24b66fb1a2481274eb3aebdc30a62766e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_quant_model.js#L729-L731
Note however that the super call does:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/bce04ce24b66fb1a2481274eb3aebdc30a62766e/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L795-L798

### Issue 2:

### Steps to reproduce:

- Steps 1 -> 5
- Click on your product line to select it
- Scan a new lot to add one new unit referring to that lot
- Confirm (1)
- Apply Now
#### > User Error: Quant's editing is restricted, you can't do this operation

Since the line is selected, you have a currentLine during the `processBarcode` and hence the existing line will be updated using the `lotName``:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/cf3c2fce8a6b7b2d7547d44a0e4423f887986d52/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1560-L1584 However, writing on the line will then try to write on the related quant during the validation process which will be forbiden since we are not allowed to change the lot of an existing quant:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e3b0ca11d99b2ef819cdad68b169112cd73668b6/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L351-L360 Now, the issue is that actually due to the nature of the line and of the barcode data, the line lot is not expected to be updated but rather a new line is expected to be created:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/cf3c2fce8a6b7b2d7547d44a0e4423f887986d52/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L795-L798

Additional issue:

Fixing issue 1 and 2 highlight and other issue of the validation process:

- Steps 1 -> 6
> The line gets selected
- Scan a newlot
> a new subline is added referring to 1 unit of your new quant
- Confirm (1) > Some serials where not counted, set them as missing
#### > Check your quants: the 10 unit lotless quant was not updated but a new quant for 1 units was created for your newlot

### Cause of the issue:

Applying all quantities is expecting to toggle them as counted before applying to update the existing quants:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c8535a7a0e2eae811048a34a0bae187a1fa45311/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_quant_model.js#L72-L82 https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c8535a7a0e2eae811048a34a0bae187a1fa45311/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_quant_model.js#L287-L296 However, only line tracked by serial numbers are set as counted: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c8535a7a0e2eae811048a34a0bae187a1fa45311/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_quant_model.js#L60-L63

opw-6212923

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118373

When a mailing is managed by a marketing automation campaign, its target domain is dynamically handled by the campaign's activities. If a user clicks the "Retry" button directly on the mailing template, it bypasses the campaign filters and queues the mailing for the entire target model, causing unintended mass spam.

This commit fixes the issue by:
1. Raising a UserError in `action_retry_failed` if the mailing is linked to marketing automation (`use_in_marketing_automation`).
2. Hiding the "Retry" button in the frontend view to prevent confusion.
3. Adding a unit test to ensure this edge case is caught in the future.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a marketing campaign with a filter and an email activity.
2. Run the activity and ensure at least one email trace fails.
3. Open the mailing template via the "Templates" smart button.
4. Click the "Retry" button on the template form.
5. The mailing is placed in the standard queue, bypassing the domain and targeting all records of the underlying model.

OPW-6220106

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119760
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118759

Steps to reproduce
---
1. With Accounting installed, import a bank statement CSV that has separate Debit and Credit columns using number separators (e.g. a line with "1.234,56").
2. Map the columns to Debit and Credit and import.

The imported amounts are multiplied by 100: "1.234,56" is imported as 123,456.00.

Issue
---
This only happens when both `account_bank_statement_import_csv` and `account_bank_statement_extract` are installed, which is the default in any Accounting database since both modules are auto-installed.

`account_bank_statement_extract` turns debit and credit into real Monetary fields on `account.bank.statement.line`:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/af863c5a53d0ab50fe67cb9ea910391d4a1979dd/account_bank_statement_extract/models/account_bank_statement_line.py#L7-L8

Because they are now real fields, the generic importer already converts those columns to floats:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bfa39854e56da4bf23295d62f63d66973ad0d78e/addons/base_import/models/base_import.py#L1281-L1285

The CSV statement wizard then parses the same columns a second time:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d7ab7ee1287342638006e290ede20b955aae8370/account_bank_statement_import_csv/wizard/account_bank_statement_import_csv.py#L92-L93

The first pass correctly reads "1.234,56" as "1234.56", but the second pass sees a lone dot, mistakes it for the thousands separator, strips it, and produces 123456. The wizard now parses debit and credit only when they are virtual fields, so when they are real fields the values parsed by the generic importer are reused instead of being parsed twice.

Without `account_bank_statement_extract`, debit and credit exist only as virtual import fields, so the generic importer skips them and the wizard parses them once. That is why the regression stays hidden until the extract module is present.

opw-6227083
---

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118979

Steps:
- Install an Odoo 17.0 database with the Indian Payroll module and demo data.
- Upgrade the database to 18.0.

Issue:
- The Indian payroll demo data creates leave allocations and approves them through an XML function call.
- During a fresh installation, demo files are loaded in 'init' mode, so the approval function is executed and the allocations move from 'confirm' to 'validate'.
- However, during a 17.0 >>> 18.0 upgrade, demo files are loaded in 'update' mode. Odoo automatically loads demo files with 'noupdate=True' from the load_demo() >> load_data() function:
- This value is passed to the XML importer and becomes the default noupdate state for the file. Since the demo XML file does not explicitly override this value, the function tag uses 'noupdate=True'.
- When the XML parser reaches the approval function, _tag_function() skips its execution because of noupdate = 'True' and mode = 'update' condition.
- As a result, the approval function is not executed during the upgrade and the leave allocations remain in 'confirm' state. Subsequent demo payroll data expects validated allocations and fails during loading.

Fix:
- Explicitly set 'noupdate=0' on the demo XML file. This overrides the default 'noupdate=True' value applied to demo files, making the parser evaluate the section with 'noupdate=False'.
- As a result, '_tag_function()' executes the approval method during upgrades, the demo leave allocations are validated in both fresh/new db installations and 17.0 >>> 18.0 upgrade scenarios.

runbot error-https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/230430 

task-6268381

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119217

This PR is the first part of a larger effort to unify the API and appearance of cards across view types (kanban records, gantt popovers, calendar popovers, map popovers, activity records, hierarchy records). All of these views share the same need: displaying a compact representation of a record.

Until now, each of these cases had its own implementation, resulting in inconsistent arch APIs (poor developer experience) and an inconsistent look across the UI (poor user experience).

As a first step toward this goal, this PR introduces the card view type and allows it to be referenced from other views via the card_id attribute. When this attribute is set on the root node of an arch, the corresponding card view is automatically inlined into the arch.

The kanban view has been refactored: its core card rendering logic has been extracted into a dedicated view/component.

The gantt popover API has been updated to use the new card API. The kanban_view_id attribute has been removed in favor of card_id, so it is no longer possible to reference a kanban view inside a popover. The popover template API has also been reworked to align with the card API (which is basically the well-known old kanban templates API). Concretely, one can now either reference a card view via the card_id attribute, or directly inline the popover-header, popover-body, and popover-footer templates, which follow the same API as cards.

Part of task~5262907

Currently, when a user without accounting permissions attempts to cancel a Manufacturing Order (MO), an Access Error is raised.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Manufacturing and Accounting with demo data.
- Users > Marc Demo > Remove Accounting Permissions and give Admin permissions for Manufacturing
- Login as Marc Demo
- Create an MO for` [D_0045_G] Stool (Green) `and try to cancel it.

## Observed Behavior:
Failed to read field mrp.workorder.employee_analytic_account_line_ids

## Root cause:
After PR [1], version 19.0 introduced access checks when reading many2many fields. As a result, if a user lacks read access to a model field, an access error is raised.

During cancellation, `action_cancel` [2] is called, and the error occurs when unlinking, since the user does not have read access to the account.analytic.line records the system throws an access error.

**Why does this error not occur in 19.3+?**
Commit [3] added `sudo` to allow cancellation of workorder
[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d7ab7ee1287342638006e290ede20b955aae8370/mrp_workorder_hr_account/models/mrp_workorder.py#L24-L26
 
## Solution:
Manufacturing Administrators often need to cancel MOs and WOs, but granting them accounting rights solely for this purpose is not always necessary. A practical solution is to allow MO cancellation through sudo privileges, which can be achieved by backporting [3].

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/217277

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/31cf5f014c48b97158042e64ad0b8e9827a6c0d5

Related Community PR: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/264925

opw-6204049

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `account_reports` module and enable developer mode.
- Navigate to Invoicing > Customers > Customers.
- Open the `Acme Corporation` record.
- Click the `Due` smart button.

**Error:**
`OwlError: Invalid props for component 'PartnerLedgerFollowupLineCell': 'cellIndex' is missing (should be a number)`

**Root Cause:**
In commit [1], `cellIndex` was added as a required props to 
`AccountReportLineCell`. However, `PartnerLedgerFollowupLineCell` 
at [2] was not updated to pass this props, causing an error.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents the error and ensures that users can open 
the `Follow-up` Report.

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/ae3e71164bea8883417793bad0bfa5ef72db758f

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c4e2259ec8fb67d799806d94ffe40ab6a40f25e/account_reports/static/src/components/partner_ledger_followup/line/line.xml#L7

opw-6296374
opw-6299717
opw-6300704
opw-6301870
opw-6245448
opw-6302816
opw-6298215
opw-6303774
opw-6301046
opw-6304518
opw-6305071
opw-6306193
opw-6306219
opw-6308514
opw-6308957
opw-6312342
opw-6312746
opw-6313506
opw-6314075
opw-6315101

## [FIX] sale_renting_planning: check global leaves working schedule

Before this commit: any `resource.calendar.leaves` with no `resource_id` created would prevent all resources from being allocated during the leave date.

After this commit: any `resource.calendar.leaves` with `no resource_id` would be applied only to resources with the same `calendar_id` as the leave.

if the leave has no `calendar_id` then the leave applies to all `resource.calendars`

if a resource has no `calendar_id` then leaves with no `calendar_id` apply to it as well

## [IMP] {website_}sale_renting_planning: move tests from industry and fix existing ones

This commit moves the tests from [odoo/industry#1980](vscode-file://vscode-app/snap/code/237/usr/share/code/resources/app/out/vs/code/electron-browser/workbench/workbench.html) to their respective standard modules.

It also fixes the logic behind some tests as they weren't testing a `planning.role` with `sync_shift_rental` enabled.

task-6179505

During Intrastat CSV export, fields `supplementary_units` formatted using [formatLang](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/81711/changes), which converts numeric values into strings (e.g., '84,0'). These string values are later reused in computations, leading to errors like:
```.py
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_nl_intrastat/models/account_intrastat_report.py", line 163, in l10n_nl_export_to_csv
    supp_unit = str(round(res['supplementary_units'])).zfill(10) if res['supplementary_units'] else '0000000000'
TypeError: type str doesn't define __round__ method
```
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2bfe0f32c0cec426fc7345ef716395146cc569ca/l10n_nl_intrastat/models/account_intrastat_report.py#L164 This occurs because the export logic expects numeric values, but receives localized strings or None.

Cause:
`formatLang` is applied at the report data level, converting floats into locale-formatted strings. These values are then used directly in arithmetic operations without normalization.

Fix:
Normalize values before computation by:
- Converting input to string
- Replacing locale-specific decimal separators (',' -> '.')
- Casting to float
- Falling back to 0 when value is None or empty

opw-6182286

## **Steps to Reproduce:**
1) Install `l10n_ch_hr_payroll`, `hr_payroll_account_iso20022` with demo data. 
2) Switch to the Swiss company and rename it.
3) create employee with address in switzerland and setup bank details with
   running contract.
4) Generate a payrun, validate it, then download the Swiss payment report.

#### **Note: Detailed video to generate this issue on v18 is attached on the ticket**

## **Obeserved Behavior:**
The report still uses the old company name instead of the renamed one.

## **Expected Behavior:**
The report should use the current company name.

## **Root Cause:**
In the payment report the `iso20022_initiating_party_name`, is set using
`iso20022_get_company_name` method at [1] and `iso20022_initiating_party_name`
was only initialized on `create` at [2], so later company renames did not
update the stored initiating party name when it matched the previous company name.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/a86b98ea4fbc060cbe2666bc87f215a680ce54e7/account_iso20022/models/account_journal.py#L442-L446

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7df2e86541a69d3160bc7165223227bde70d7291/account_iso20022/models/res_company.py#L16-L24

## **Fix:**
Update the stored ISO20022 initiating party name on company write whenever it still matches the previous sanitized company name.

**opw-6159675**

Currently, access rights for `mail.message` rely on a set of layered rules. If an administrator attempts to manage (edit, delete, or duplicate) a message record—and fails all of these contextual evaluations, they are ultimately blocked by an AccessError.

For example:
- Mitchell Admin sends a mass mailing via CRM app.
- The email fails to send.
- Marc Demo (an administrator with no access to CRM) tries to edit, delete, or duplicate the failed email. Because he fails the specific contextual access rules for that message, he is blocked.

This behavior is overly restrictive. Administrators already possess the power to elevate their privileges, grant themselves access to any app, or log in as other users. Blocking them from managing critical communications (like a stalled mass mailing queue) forces them to use unnecessary workarounds.

This commit resolves the issue by short-circuiting the `_check_access` method. If the environment is in admin mode (`self.env.is_admin`), we bypass the complex rule evaluations entirely and grant immediate access.

We specifically implemented this via a Python override rather than modifying `ir.rule` records in `security.xml`. This ensures the fix can be safely backported to stable versions without requiring a forced XML data update on existing databases. It also keeps this specific security bypass centralized within the mail module's existing architecture.

Module: l10n_it_pos

Steps to reproduce:
- In the POS settings, enable "Automatic Receipt Printing";
- Enable "ePos Printer" to make the "Skip Preview Screen" option appear;
- Disable "Skip Preview Screen";
- Disable "ePos Printer";
- Set up an Italian Fiscal Printer;
- Open a POS session and process a first order. Issue: After the first receipt, no other messages (price display, receipt, open register) are sent to the fiscal printer. A page reload is required.

Issue: After the first receipt, no other messages (price display, receipt, open register) are sent to the fiscal printer. A page reload is required.

Cause:
When "Automatic Receipt Printing" is true but "Skip Preview Screen" is false, a race condition occurs. `afterOrderValidation` triggers a print job while simultaneously transitioning to the `ReceiptScreen`. When the `ReceiptScreen` mounts, it triggers a second fiscal print job before the first has resolved. This creates a deadlock in `toHtml` of  `renderService`, permanently blocking the printer queue.

Solution:
Since the italian localisation sending the receipt to the fiscal printer is mandatory, the printing route is now tied to the "Skip Preview Screen" option.

Enterprise PR: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/112654

[opw-5979212](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/5979212)

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

Module: l10n_it_pos

Steps to reproduce:
- In the POS settings, enable "Automatic Receipt Printing";
- Enable "ePos Printer" to make the "Skip Preview Screen" option appear;
- Disable "Skip Preview Screen";
- Disable "ePos Printer";
- Set up an Italian Fiscal Printer;
- Open a POS session and process a first order.

Issue: After the first receipt, no other messages (price display, receipt, open register) are sent to the fiscal printer. A page reload is required.

Cause:
When "Automatic Receipt Printing" is true but "Skip Preview Screen" is false, a race condition occurs. `afterOrderValidation` triggers a print job while simultaneously transitioning to the `ReceiptScreen`. When the `ReceiptScreen` mounts, it triggers a second fiscal print job before the first has resolved. This creates a deadlock in `toHtml` of  `renderService`, permanently blocking the printer queue.

Solution:
Since the italian localisation sending the receipt to the fiscal printer is mandatory, the printing route is now tied to the "Skip Preview Screen" option.
UI settings are adjusted to hide the redundant auto-print checkbox when an IT fiscal printer is configured.

Community PR: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/256932

[opw-5979212](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/5979212)

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Set a default tax on the "Cash Difference Gain" account (e.g. a 25%
   sales tax) -- required in some countries like Denmark (cf 5972690).
2. Open a PoS session, count more cash than expected at closing.
3. Try to close the session.

-> Error message shows up "The journal entry reached an invalid
state..." ... "The journal entry must always have exactly one journal
item involving the bank/cash account"

What's happening
----------------
PoS creates a bank statement line with the gain account as counterpart,
resulting in 2 lines: cash +10, gain -10. Since the gain account has a
default tax, `_sync_tax_lines` adds a tax line of -2.5 on top, which
makes the move unbalanced by 2.5. Then `_sync_unbalanced_lines` adds a
4th line to fix it, on the line returned by
`_get_automatic_balancing_account`, which is `journal.default_account_id`,
i.e. the cash account itself for a cash journal.

So we end up with 2 lines on that same cash account, which a bank
statement line move doesn't allow -> Error.

The fix
-------
In `_post_statement_difference`, precompute the base and tax split
ourselves and build the statement line's `line_ids` directly (e.g. for
+10 and a 25% tax: cash +10, gain -8, tax -2). The move is balanced
from creation, so `_sync_tax_lines` and `_sync_unbalanced_lines` don't
have to touch it.

Note that we force the tax computation to be in 'force_price_include'
mode, as the counted cash difference is a gross amount (physical money
in the drawer). This way the tax is always extracted from the cash
amount, regardless of how the tax is configured (included or excluded
in price). Same pattern is already used by `hr_expense` (cf
`hr_expense.models.account_move_line._compute_totals`).

opw-5972690

Behavior before:
Adjusting physical inventory quantities for reserved packages takes time when linked to large delivery orders (e.g., 400+ lines). The user interface freezes, causing a poor warehouse user experience during stock counts.

Behavior after:
Inventory adjustments on reserved packages process faster. The UI remains responsive, and package records are updated instantly without performance degradation.

Root Cause:
When an inventory adjustment triggers '_free_reservation', it processes move lines sequentially. Inside this loop, Odoo recursively runs '_check_entire_pack()', forcing a full database evaluation of all 400+ delivery lines for every single line adjusted. This results in heavy, redundant processing.

Fix:
Used a context flag `bypass_entire_pack=True` to silence the '_check_entire_pack()' validation while looping through individual line adjustments. Once the loop completes, the package validation is called exactly once in batch for all affected pickings, preserving data integrity while eliminating redundant database queries.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Have a product tracked by Lot and Package.
2. Have an open delivery order in Ready state (stock reserved) containing 400 or more lines of this product, one package per line.
3. Go to Inventory → Physical Inventory.
4. Set the counted quantity of any reserved bag to 0.
5. Click Apply.
6. Observe that the system takes time to process this single change.
7. Unreserve the delivery order.
8. Perform the same steps as mentioned above.
9. Inventory adjustment is much faster.

opw-6234885

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

## The Problem
When grouping messages, the code was accumulating recordsets using the `|=` union operator inside a loop. Since each union call internally builds an `OrderedSet` over all previously accumulated IDs, the performance degraded quadratically relative to the number of document records. This caused bottlenecks on databases with large message volumes.

## The Solution
* Replaced the `|=` recordset accumulation with a plain Python dictionary of ordered sets to store IDs per operation, while keeping same behavior.
* Deferred the `browse()` call until after the loop is complete.
* Reduced the overall complexity from **$O(N^2)$** to **$O(N)$**.

---

## Benchmarks
*Tested on a customer database grouping by "Created By" and "Created On":*

| Record Count | Before | After | Improvement |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **300k records** | 83.00s | **1.00s** | **-99%** |
| **30k records** | 0.60s | 0.25s | (Minor) |

**Note:** The performance gains become exponentially more significant as the record count grows.

**OPW-6123758**

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260147