Bug introduced in: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/cfc5c998035b4268c36f5097782888e18e21b4fe

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Create a product with a BoM with operation dependencies enabled
- Add 4 operations on the same workcenter:
    - opA: no blocker
    - opB: blocked by opA
    - opC: blocked by opA
    - opD: blocked by opC
- Confirm a manufacturing order from this BoM
- Click Plan

Problem:
opA was scheduled after opB, violating the dependency.

`_plan_workorders` starts planning from the "leaf" workorders (those with no dependents). Given the structure above, the initial set is [opB, opD]. Processing opB first correctly plans opA then opB. But processing opD triggers a recursive chain opD→opC→opA which calls `action_unplan(opA)` and replans it from scratch. By then, opB already occupies the workcenter slot that opA originally held, so opA ends up scheduled after opB.

Solution:
Add `and not wo.is_planned` to the filter on `blocked_by_workorder_ids` in the recursive call inside `_plan_workorders`. Workorders that are already planned are skipped instead of being unplanned and replanned, preserving the correct order.

opw-6299179

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271565

**Problem:**
When an attendance has overtimes across multiple days, those overtimes can
overlap when calculating their intervals.

There will always be rounding errors since only the durations are saved to 3
decimals, but this is normally fine since the durations are accumulated when
calculating the next interval.

However, on a day boundary in the employee timezone, the end of the interval is
forced to the end of day, which incidentally removes the rounding error. This
causes the overlap when calculating the next interval since its start will be
based on the rounded duration, not the actual end of day.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Configure an overtime rule where >8 hours is considered overtime, and a
second rule applies to non-working days
- Set Overtime Rule on employee "Anita Oliver"
- Set employee work entry source to "Attendances"
- Create an attendance that exceeds 8 hours in a day and crosses into a
non-working day and creates enough of a rounding error (see unit test)

-> Traceback error:
`ValueError: Expected singleton: hr.attendance.overtime.line(1, 2)`

**Solution:**
Add an additional check to ensure the overtime cannot start on the previous
day.

opw-6067969

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119672
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118570

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `accountant` module and log in as admin.
- Create and confirm a vendor bill.
- Send an image in the chatter of the vendor bill.
- Open a new tab and log in as a demo user.
- Open the same vendor bill.
- Click the gear icon.

**Observation:**
An access error is raised, and the gear icon is not accessible.

**Root Cause:**
At [1], the method `_should_attach_to_record` incorrectly excludes
image attachments, causing them to be treated as `extra_files_data`
at [2]. As a result, in `_fix_attachments_on_record_from_files_data` at [3],
these attachments are assigned `res_model=False` and `res_id=0`. When the
code tries to access these attachments at [4], it leads to an access error.
Additionally, when we try to print `Original Bills`, we get the same access 
error at [5], and later the code calls the `browse` function on 
`self.env[attachment.res_model]`, but for `extra_files_data` we set the 
`res_model=False`, which results in a `KeyError`(see [6]).

**Fix:**
This commit prevents the error and ensures that users can access
the gear icon when an image is attached in the chatter and 
print the `Original Bills`.

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/95864190a71b68eb10ae59ae8f38ac35b0cb6a97/addons/account/models/account_document_import_mixin.py#L416-L429

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/95864190a71b68eb10ae59ae8f38ac35b0cb6a97/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L6668-L6672

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/95864190a71b68eb10ae59ae8f38ac35b0cb6a97/addons/account/models/account_document_import_mixin.py#L409-L414

[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7e874e7db30e05a02d6eeb26d9d67ed6176b9704/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L6944-L6949

[5]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7e874e7db30e05a02d6eeb26d9d67ed6176b9704/addons/account/models/ir_actions_report.py#L30-L34

[6]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/261463#issuecomment-4602692978

opw-6119155

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261463

The tag remapping was running in pre-migrate, before the module's data files are loaded. This caused the tag swap to be silently skipped for any new tag that didn't exist yet, and the subsequent cleanup to fail with a FK violation on account_account_account_tag.
```py
 File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/sql_db.py", line 417, in execute
    self._obj.execute(query, params)
psycopg2.errors.ForeignKeyViolation: update or delete on table "account_account_tag" violates foreign key constraint "account_account_account_tag_account_account_tag_id_fkey" on table "account_account_account_tag"
DETAIL:  Key (id)=(356) is still referenced from table "account_account_account_tag".
```

Moving to post-migrate ensures all new account tags are present in the database before the remapping and cleanup run.

upg-[4341331]

[4341331]: https://upgrade.odoo.com/odoo/upgrade.request/4341331?debug=1


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269809

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Create a Purchase Order with an expected Arrival date in the past
- Confirm the Purchase Order
- Validate the receipt partially and create a backorder
- Cancel the generated backorder
- Open the Purchase Orders list and check the 'Late Receipts'

Issue:
------
The Purchase Order still appears in the 'Late Receipts' filter even
though there is no remaining receipt to process.

Cause:
------
The 'Late Receipts' filter relies on the computed search field
`is_late`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/324df67c099ab18c6fe7c8f77212cf809debf383/addons/purchase/views/purchase_views.xml#L439

The search domain for this field is generated by
`purchase.order._search_is_late()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/324df67c099ab18c6fe7c8f77212cf809debf383/addons/purchase/models/purchase_order.py#L176

In `purchase_stock`, `_get_domain_is_late()` extends the base domain to
identify Purchase Orders that still have receipts pending:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/324df67c099ab18c6fe7c8f77212cf809debf383/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order.py#L264-L267

After a partial receipt:
- the original receipt is in state `done`,
- a backorder is created and linked to the Purchase Order,
- the backorder is later cancelled and moves to state `cancel`,
- the Purchase Order line still has `qty_received < product_qty`.

The existing domain excludes only `done` pickings when determining
whether a receipt is still pending. As a result, a cancelled backorder
is still treated as an unfinished receipt, causing the Purchase Order
to remain visible in the 'Late Receipts' filter.

Fix:
----
Exclude both `done` and `cancel` pickings when determining whether a
Purchase Order has pending receipts.

A cancelled backorder indicates that the remaining quantity will not be
received through that transfer. Therefore, once all related pickings are
either completed or cancelled, the Purchase Order should no longer be
considered late.

---
opw-6266046

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268488

The Time Off Balance report shows incorrect remaining days when overlapping allocations exist and a leave only overlaps the later one.

### **Steps to reproduce:**
1) Install time off app.
2) Create a simple time off type.
- Create Allocation A (10 days, 01-01-2024 to 31-12-2025)
- Create Allocation B (10 days, 01-01-2025 to 31-12-2026) 
3) Create a leave of 1 day on 01-01-2026
4) Open the Balance report

### **Observed Behavior:**
The report shows 20 remaining days.

### **Expected Behavior:**
The report should show 19 remaining days (20 allocated - 1 taken).

### **Cause:**
In the taken_per_allocation CTE at [1], each leave is joined to every allocation it overlaps. The [fifo_balances] CTE then uses the formula:
```
GREATEST(alloc_days - GREATEST(taken - prior_cumulative_alloc, 0), 0)
```
This subtracts the prior allocation capacity (A = 10 days) from the taken count (B = 1 day). Since 1 - 10 = -9, GREATEST(-9, 0) = 0, so zero days are deducted from B. The formula wrongly assumes that prior allocations can absorb leaves that do not overlap with them.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f0fa79fa21d2005dd5cd132c18b2be45424166a6/addons/hr_holidays/report/hr_leave_employee_type_report.py#L126-L142

[fifo_balances]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f0fa79fa21d2005dd5cd132c18b2be45424166a6/addons/hr_holidays/report/hr_leave_employee_type_report.py#L145-L164

### **Fix:**
Ensure that leaves are only deducted from allocations they actually
overlap by calculating the balance using the delta of cumulative leaves
within an overlap group. This prevents earlier allocations from absorbing
leaves that occur outside their validity period.

**opw-6150161**

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271596
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263029

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable: Multi-Steps Routes
- Inventory > Configuration > Warehouse Management > Routes
- Unarchive MTO
- Create a storable product P with MTO buy and a set vendor
- Create and confirm a sale order for 1 unit of P
- Confirm the assocaited PO and change the pol quantity from 1 to 10
> the associated receipt is updated from 1 to 10
- Change the pol quantity from 10 to 7
#### > The quantity on the receipt is updated from 10 to 16.

### Cause of the issue:

Changing the quantity of the POL will adapt the picking related quantity via these lines:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bf89b4f467390807c20f7b007a875a77542e76f/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L115-L117 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bf89b4f467390807c20f7b007a875a77542e76f/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L342-L349 by creating new stock moves to be merged:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bf89b4f467390807c20f7b007a875a77542e76f/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L220-L251 Now, the issue is that this flows relies both on a negative `qty_to_attach` of `1 - 10 = -9` and a positive `qty_to_push` of `7 - 1 = 6`. However, the `qty_to_attach` is only used if is positive: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bf89b4f467390807c20f7b007a875a77542e76f/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order_line.py#L243-L251 The receipt is therefore updated by a `+6` move to push but not by the `-9` move to attach. Leading to a 10 -> 16 rather than 10 -> 7 result.

opw-6218307

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270547
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264994

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Create a product with a tax (e.g. 15%).
2. Create a pricelist that changes the price (e.g. 100 to 200).
3. Create a fiscal position mapping the tax (e.g. 15% to 30%).
4. Add the pricelist and the fiscal position in PoS.
5. Add the product to the cart, and select the tax and the pricelist created in the previous steps.
6. Long press on the product to see its info.

The price should be 200 now after selecting the pricelist. Also the tax should be 30% bc of the FP mapping, i.e. total price should be 200 + 30% = 260.

However, we observe that VAT shows 15 (15%) instead of 60 (30%), and Price incl. Tax shows 230 instead of 260.

What's happening:
-----------------
On the frontend, `getTaxDetails()` is called with no options, so it uses the product `list_price` (100) and `taxes_id` (15%), giving VAT = 15.

Alos, on the backned, `self.taxes_id` is used directly to compute the taxes, even though the pricelist price is correct (200), fiscal position is ignored, hence 200 + 15% = 230 instead of 200 + 30% = 260.

The fix:
--------
On frontend, we pass the pricelist and fiscal position to `getTaxDetails`, and compute the tax name from the mapped taxes.

On the backend, we read the `fiscal_position_id` from the context and apply the tax mapping, so the correct taxes are used.

opw-6200632

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271396
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266012