### 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#120640
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120051

# Introduction note
This PR fixes two bugs introduced by the same commit :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/106d70a1ef0ddbd61a74b7cac82dfce1e316beaa

The original commit fixed multiple issues regarding the display of recurring plans when
the One-time purchase option was enabled, but it also introduced new ones.

Theses new issues are due to multiple new checks on `allow_one_time_sale`, but this
variable only indicates that the One-time purchase option is available to the user, not that
it is actually selected. So the fixes of the original commit works when first loading the page,
but fails when the content of the page is updated.

# Shared steps
- Activate Subscriptions & eCommerce modules
- Create a subscription product, enable 'Accept One-Time' and publish it on the website

# Bug 1
 
## How to reproduce
- Add atleast two recurring plans to the product
- Go to the product page on the website
- Select one of the recurring plans
- Increase the quantity of the product

## The problem
The recurring plan selection is removed

## Cause
The condition `!combination_info.allow_one_time_sale` was added on the `t-att-checked` of the recurring plan selection display. This correctly fixed the issue when first loading the page, but when the user changes the price or the variant, the recurring plan are
recomputed and rerendered :

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0b408acbadb2cfcbc844521f3244a06b7ae7be22/website_sale_subscription/static/src/interactions/product_page.js#L37-L40

When that is the case, that condition blocks the proper display of the selected recurring plan.

## Proposed Solution
When loading the recurring plan selection, what defines wich plan is selected is the
`subscription_default_pricing_plan_id` variable, which is based on the
`plan_id` value given in the request to the server :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0b408acbadb2cfcbc844521f3244a06b7ae7be22/website_sale_subscription/models/product_template.py#L222

We make it so if no `plan_id` is sent to the server and `allow_one_time_sale` is
enabled, then the server does not give back any `subscription_default_pricing_plan_id`

opw-6131532

# Bug 2

## How to reproduce
- Add an attribute with values A & B for the product
- Define atleast two recurring plans for the variant with attribute B
- Publish the product
- Go to the product page
- Select the variant with attribute B

## The problem
The recurring plan is not displayed. If the order of the attribute is reversed, then it works as expected.

## Cause
The pricings are correcly sent to the front-end but they are not added to selection because
of the check on  `allow_one_time_sale` :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0b408acbadb2cfcbc844521f3244a06b7ae7be22/website_sale_subscription/static/src/interactions/product_page.js#L42-L50

opw-6132160

Step to reproduce:
- install `l10n_be_pos_blackbox` with demo data
- go to pos → configurations → point of sales
- select 2 or more configs and try to archive

Observation:
- Traceback 
```
  File "/19.0/l10n_be_pos_blackbox/models/pos_config.py", line 73, in write
    if (vals.get('l10n_be_blackbox_be_id') or self.l10n_be_pos_id):
                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/19.0/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1659, in __get__
    record.ensure_one()
  File "/19.0/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5940, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: pos.config(3, 4, 5)
```
Cause:
- it looks like `l10n_be_pos_id` is a m2o field and `self.l10n_be_pos_id` should 
work for multiple records, but `l10n_be_pos_id` is a char fields and hence 
this is not resolved and we get error

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/42e438b1366f48addbe826f363952d3261467c33/l10n_be_pos_blackbox/models/pos_config.py#L20-L26

Fix:
- use `mapped` to check values in multiple records

opw-6305769

The website appointment calendar fills availabilities one month at a time and the update_available_slots route maps the calendar month index to an absolute month from datetime.now(). This only matches the displayed months when the first one is the current month. When the first bookable slot is later, a punctual appointment starting in a future month or any appointment whose "at least X hours before start time" lead time pushes the first slot past the current month, navigating forward requests the wrong month and the reached month renders empty.

In update_available_slots, take the lead time into account when computing the reference month so it lands on the first displayed month: the start datetime for a punctual appointment starting in the future, otherwise now plus the minimum schedule hours. The navigated month index is then added to that reference. This extends https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/f0e5b14a823cf97218f4094d287a328e2744fd73 which only handled the future start datetime.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open the Appointments app
2. Open an appointment type, set Schedule to Weekly and Allow Bookings to On specific dates with a range ending a few months out
3. Set the "at least N hours before start time" field to 360
4. Save and click the Preview button in the header
5. Pick a resource or staff member to reach the calendar
6. Click the right arrow to navigate to the next month

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

opw-6206293

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have the company calendar work from 9 to 17 on weekdays
- In project gantt view, create tasks with dependencies like this:
```
- [Task 1] (June 08, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM) ──┐
                                            ├─> [Task 3] (June 11, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM)
- [Task 2] (June 10, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM) ──┘
```
- Make sure the "Auto-Reschedule (Keep Buffer)" is selected
- Then reschedule task 1 to `(June 09, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM)`
- Task 3 is rescheduled to `(June 15, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM)`

**Expected behavior:**
To respect the buffers, task 3 should have been rescheduled to `(June 12, 09:00 AM - 10:00 AM)`:
- The buffer from task 1 is  23 working hours after `June 09, 10:00 AM` is `June 12, 09:00 AM`
- The buffer from task 2 doesn't affect the rescheduling.

Cause:
----------------------------------------
From `_web_gantt_update_next_candidates_dates()` we call `_get_new_dates()` with `seconds_between_tasks` being the duration of working hours between the end of task 1 and the start of task 3. We also call it with `first_possible_start_date_per_candidate` being the end of task 3 also depends on task 2.

Then `_get_new_dates()` counts the working hours from `first_possible_start_date_per_candidate` until it reaches `seconds_between_tasks`. Which means the buffer between task 1 and task 3 is actually applied between task 2 and task 3.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
The value contained in `first_possible_start_date_per_candidate` is irrelevant, the correct value to give to `_get_new_dates()` would be `compute_end_date` as we want to keep the buffer to be calculated from this datetime.
So we create a fake dictionary with only the task and `compute_end_date` and give it to `_get_new_dates()`.

The same logic applies when moving tasks backwards.

opw-5973597