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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116166

*=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#120433
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113277

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118950

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:
----------------------------------------
- Create two rules in an overtime ruleset:
    - Non-working hours rule: 
        - Timing
         - Outside of a specific schedule
         - Select a schedule working Monday to Friday
    - Weekend rule:
        - Timing
        - On any non-working day
- Give this ruleset to an employee
- Create an attendance for this employee
    - from 21pm on Friday
    - to 4am on Saturday, the next day
- Check the overtime lines of the attendance
- There is only one overtime line for the first rule

Cause:
----------------------------------------
In the overtime refactor 49952e57ab2e8af908112fa77acd22a5e26fa627 the method `_get_dates()` was introduced to get the dates which an attendance overlap.

It uses `rrule()` to create a list of datetime:
`list(rrule(DAILY, dtstart=localized_start, until=localized_end))`

But `rrule` is returning a new date every 24 hours after the time given in `dtstart`. In our example only the datetime onat 21pm on Friday is returned. If it was ending after 21pm on Friday this time would also be returned.

These dates are given as `min_check_in` and `max_check_out`. So later these dates are used to calculate the non-working days:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8d14665af5acf1bd391d05a5048dc701986e8b15/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance_overtime_rule.py#L441-L448

Only Friday is returned, so the second rule is ignored.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
We use `date()` when calling `rrule()` so the hours are ignored.

This has no impact as `min_check_in` and `max_check_out` are always used later with `datetime.combine(min_check_in, datetime.min.time())`.

opw-6159674

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267202

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#270168
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262671

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable: Multi-Steps Routes
- Put your warehouse in delivery in 2 steps
- On the receipt operation type change the return operation type to be "pick" by default.
- Create and confirm a PO for 1 unit of P
- Validate the receipt > return > Create the return for 1 unit
- Change the operation type of the return from Pick to Delivery to return the product in one step.
- Validate the return
#### > The qty_received is updated from 1 to 2 instead of 0.

### Cause of the issue:

Updating the `picking_type_id` of the return will also update the `location_dest_id` to the default values:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/89807c10c20fb533124b18815f307fc3c380528d/addons/stock/models/stock_picking.py#L1138-L1147
However, the default values of the `Delivery` is "Partner/customer". As such, the location dest of the move is also updated to be "Partner/customer". Now the issue is that the `qty_received` only considers moves to be returned if the location dest usage is not 'supplier':
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/89807c10c20fb533124b18815f307fc3c380528d/addons/purchase/models/purchase_order_line.py#L226-L231 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/89807c10c20fb533124b18815f307fc3c380528d/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L55-L67 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/89807c10c20fb533124b18815f307fc3c380528d/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L76-L77 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/89807c10c20fb533124b18815f307fc3c380528d/addons/purchase_stock/models/stock_move.py#L129-L131

opw-6292918

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269867

*: l10n_{ar,co,in,pe,uy}_pos

**Problem:**
The POS "Edit/Create customer" Form was switched to a standalone, hardcoded form view (view_partner_form_pos_ui) that inherits nothing during [1], in the attempt to simplify the view when accessed from the PoS.

Every field that localizations and other modules add to the partner form by inheriting base.view_partner_form therefore disappeared when accessed from PoS. Some of the fields are required, for example, to invoice.

**Solution:**
Keep the simplified view as the default, but route the view selection through an overridable hook that localization can tweak case by case. The override is applied to the affected POS bridges (see module list).

Add a test to prevent future regression.


**Note:**
Another possibility is to re-inherit for each localization the new
standalone view, but this fix would need to update the module to work,
while this one works with just a restart.
There are still ongoing discussion with PoS team to see if we really
want to go back to each localization needing to inherit backend views.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/230721/changes#diff-66cd201e7e8cfff5218a9fa93efd72f0bd77659b87359f2ca8763702462aaf92R26

opw-6244777 (many more)

*: br,cl,ec,gt,it,ke,mx

**Problem:**
The POS "Edit/Create customer" Form was switched to a standalone, hardcoded form view (view_partner_form_pos_ui) that inherits nothing during [1], in the attempt to simplify the view when accessed from the PoS.

Every field that localizations and other modules add to the partner form by inheriting base.view_partner_form therefore disappeared when accessed from PoS. Some of the fields are required, for example, to invoice.

**Solution:**
Keep the simplified view as the default, but route the view selection through an overridable hook that localization can tweak case by case. The override is applied to the affected POS bridges (see module list).

Add a test to prevent future regression.

**Note:**
Another possibility is to re-inherit for each localization the new standalone view, but this fix would need to update the module to work, while this one works with just a restart.
There are still ongoing discussion with PoS team to see if we really want to go back to each localization needing to inherit backend views.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/230721/changes#diff-66cd201e7e8cfff5218a9fa93efd72f0>

opw-6244777 (many more)

### 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#120793
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120051

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270228

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_de` module and switch to a `DE Company`.
- Enable `Peppol` in the Invoicing app settings.
- Open the `DE Company` customer record.
- In the `Invoicing` tab, change the Peppol ID code from `Germany VAT` 
  to `Germany Leitweg-ID` and set a code (e.g., `13075957-K000-52`).
- In the `Contacts & Addresses` tab, create an invoice-type contact named `test`.
- Create a new invoice using the `test` contact.
- Send the invoice via Peppol.
- Download the generated `XML` and inspect the `BuyerReference` field.

**Observation:**
The `<cbc:BuyerReference>` field is set to `N/A` instead of the configured `Leitweg-ID`.

**Root Cause:**
At [1], the `BuyerReference` node is populated using `vals['customer']`. 
For invoices addressed to an invoice-type contact, the contact itself 
does not contain the Peppol configuration, which is stored on the 
commercial partner. As a result, the code fails to retrieve the 
customer's `Leitweg-ID` and leaves the `BuyerReference` field empty.

**Fix:**
This commit ensures that the configured Leitweg-ID is correctly added to the 
`BuyerReference` field for child contact.

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/281658e86971687656f3235ac1ff8afcb52f2908/addons/account_edi_ubl_cii/models/account_edi_xml_ubl_xrechnung.py#L87-L97

opw-6269478

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270459
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269818

Steps to reproduce
---
1. Set an employee to work 8 hours per day.
2. Open the timesheet timer in the systray, type a duration like 8:00 and save.
3. Open the My Timesheets grid for that day.

The day is marked as overtime (yellow) even though only 8 hours were logged.

Issue
---
While the entry is open the timer keeps running and, every second, writes the elapsed time into unit_amount down to the second. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/a3c9295cf28b47f43233ac6a9f4106810842e37a/timesheet_grid/static/src/components/timesheet_timer_inline_form/timesheet_timer_inline_form.js#L89-L102

When the duration is set by hand, the save skips the usual rounding and keeps the value as it is. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/a3c9295cf28b47f43233ac6a9f4106810842e37a/timesheet_grid/static/src/components/timesheet_timer_inline_form/timesheet_timer_inline_form.js#L120-L132

So the clean 8:00 the user typed gets a few extra seconds from the next timer tick (8h 1s, stored as 8.000277) and is saved with them. The seconds are hidden in the HH:MM display but are enough to push the day above its working hours, so the grid paints it as overtime. This timer form is new in saas-19.2 (c3dac6ccdb5), which is why earlier versions are not affected.

The fix ignores timer ticks once the duration has been set by hand, so the typed value is kept.

opw-6180676
---

Currently, an error occurs when opening the gantt view of work orders.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install `mrp_workorder` with demo data.
 - Go to `Settings` > `Technical` > `Resource` > `Resources`.
 - Open the `Assembly 1` resource and remove its `working time`.
 - Go to `Manufacturing` > `Operations` > `Work Orders`.
 - Switch to the `Gantt view`.

`KeyError: 22`

when the user opens the Gantt view, the system checks the unavailability of work centers and employees 
based on their resource calendars. While computing unavailable intervals for resources [1], resources 
without a calendar are flexible resources. If no leave interval exists within the specified start and end 
range that matches the domain, the resource is not included in the result [2]. when updating the 
unavailable intervals dictionary [3], the resource is missing. As a result, when it later tries to access 
the unavailable intervals for that resource, it raises an error [4].

This commit prevents the error by safely handling resources that are not present in the unavailable 
intervals dictionary by using an empty list instead.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f666de440479dd3d30b7b6cf7c42862c5fcb37a/addons/resource/models/resource_resource.py#L186

[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f666de440479dd3d30b7b6cf7c42862c5fcb37a/addons/resource/models/resource_calendar.py#L532-L536

[3]:https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f666de440479dd3d30b7b6cf7c42862c5fcb37a/addons/resource/models/resource_resource.py#L187

[4] https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/47f2e9e88fa0bbb8852fe7734c6bece4dca8b9d0/mrp_workorder/models/mrp_workorder.py#L692-L694

sentry-7525704808

This PR is one of many triggered by responses from Luxembourg auditors. See PR #113316 for a full list of these PRs.

As described in PR #117799, the \CustomerID and \SupplierID elements on \Transaction\Line elements is determined by a partner's `customer_rank` and `supplier_rank`.  This is a binary designation, one or the other.

The Luxembourg FAIA report requires that less than 30% of \Transaction\Line elements with payable accounts (class 6) can not have \SupplierID. The same applies for \Transaction\Line elements with receivable accounts (class 7) and the \CustomerID element.

TSB clarified that any partner on an receivable or payable line should be added to the Customer list or Supplier list respectively https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/100749#issuecomment-3655127511. In addition, I verified that Luxembourg's analysis of four separate FAIA files (from ticket 5427296) aligns with this expectation. 

<img width="1322" height="690" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1a82f99e-5b32-4dbb-96e1-1b25bab2629b" />

This commit adds partners to the \Supplier and \Customer lists if they have any payable or receivable lines, respectively. It also picks between the \CustomerID and \SupplierID based on a line's `account_type`. This logic is applied to `account_saft` and updates the other, country-specific SAFT reports where appropriate. 

It also retains the previous `customer_rank` and `supplier_rank` logic as a fallback for older XML reports and for accounts other than `asset_receivable` or `liability_payable`.

opw-6118024

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120365
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118714

The quantity on hand for a main company with branches is calculated to be the the sum of all its child companies + its own quantities.  `_run_fifo_get_stack()` doesn't include the child companies in the `moves_domain`, so it is unable to create a FIFO stack for moves from a child. This leaves extra quantity unaccounted for, which defaults to the standard_price.

**Video of the bug:**
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PIfNAIb_Yyo4A-3R0CRF0NV6_HE6EwF/view

**Issue:**
When multiple companies are selected, the displayed quantity on hand for a product is calculated as the sum of all selected companies. However, the moves domain only looks at the main selected company instead of all selected companies, leading to an incorrectly calculated standard price when using FIFO. This is more apparent on lot-valuated products because the lot standard price is recalculated every time the field is accessed.

**Reproduction steps:**
- Have a main company
- Create a branch company
- Create a product, configure it as FIFO on both the main company and branch company 
- Let the product be tracked by lots and set to `Valuation by Lot` (for demonstrative purposes)
- On the main company, set the product cost to $15 (for demonstrative purposes)
- Go to only the branch company, make a purchase for one unit of the FIFO product at $100 (make a warehouse for delivery) , validate the receipt
- Go to the lot -> When logged in to only the branch company, quantity is 1 and cost is $100 (correct). When logged in to both the main and branch company and viewing from the main company, quantity is 1 and cost is $15 (incorrect)

**Fix:** 
Allow `_run_fifo_get_stack()` to see the moves from all companies in the environment instead of just the main company

Related ticket: opw-6064126

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269942
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#258199