[[FIX] mrp: calculate real duration excluding non-productive intervals](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/248381/changes/fac6b2540a32a015f56085c2c27ba4281eb659cf)
and deduplicating overlaps

* Current Situation: Currently real duration is total duration of each
time tracking which
is not consistent with the time that use to calculate the cost for
valuation , see https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/205154 .The real
duration of a work order was incorrectly summing all time tracking
entries regardless of their loss type, and using simple addition which
double-counts overlapping intervals.

* Solution:
- Filter time entries to only 'productive' and 'performance' loss types,
  excluding 'availability' and 'quality' as they represent
downtime/blocking
  time, not actual work duration.
- Pool all productive and performance entries into a single Intervals
call
  so that overlaps across both types are merged in one pass.

Note: the enterprise17 implementation groups time entries by loss_type
into
separate buckets before calling Intervals, which means overlaps between
'productive' and 'performance' entries are not merged and get
double-counted.
Pooling both types together before the Intervals call avoids this.

* This also fix:
- Fix _set_duration to ensure newly created time entries start after the
  latest existing entry's end date. Without this, calling _set_duration
  twice in quick succession (e.g. in tests) produces two entries with
  overlapping timestamps, which Intervals correctly merges into one,
  causing the computed duration to be half the expected value.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270809
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#248381

Currently, an error occurs when a user tries to create a group time off.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `hr_presence` module without demo data.
 - Go to `Employees` > `Configuration` > `Working Times` > `Time Types` and 
   delete all records.
 - Make sure there are at least `two employee` records.
 -  Go to `Employees` and switch to the `list view`.
 - Select `both employees` > click `Presence Control` > click `Create a Time Off`.

**Error1:**
`TypeError: unsupported operand types in: hr.work.entry.type() | None`

**Error2:**
`AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'ids'`

When a user creates a group time off record and the wizard is opened, it computes the valid work 
entry types. If no work entry type exists, accessing the `True` key (`requires_allocation`) from the 
empty dictionary returns None [1]. Later, when performing a union (|) between an empty work entry 
type recordset and None, it raises the first error [2]. Additionally, accessing ids on None raises 
the error [3].

This commit ensures that when no work entry type exists, accessing key(requires_allocation) from 
an empty dictionary returns an empty work entry type record instead of None.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/374f48cfba75ff98f53d8c3fcc51847711bd406a/addons/hr_holidays/wizard/hr_leave_generate_multi_wizard.py#L144-L145

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/374f48cfba75ff98f53d8c3fcc51847711bd406a/addons/hr_holidays/wizard/hr_leave_generate_multi_wizard.py#L146

[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/374f48cfba75ff98f53d8c3fcc51847711bd406a/addons/hr_holidays/wizard/hr_leave_generate_multi_wizard.py#L148

sentry-7552717400

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270302

Currently an error occurs when user opens stock report after uninstalling mrp.

Steps to replicate:
- Install mrp.
- Uninstall mrp and open `Stock > Reporting > Stock`.

Error:
```
ValueError: Invalid field product.product.is_kits in condition ('is_kits', '=', False)
```

Cause:
- The `mrp` module overrides the `stock.action_product_stock_view` window action domain with `is_kits` field referenced inside [1].

- When mrp is uninstalled, the `is_kits` field is removed from `product.product` but the overridden action domain remains stored in the database. Opening the action then tries to evaluate a domain referencing a non-existent field, resulting in this error.

Solution:
- Restore the original `stock.action_product_stock_view` domain during mrp uninstallation to remove the `is_kits` condition.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c8390638cae4b4dafb805bc0d3a4149fb5194934/addons/mrp/views/product_views.xml#L164-L166

sentry-7332688253
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269512

## **Issue:**
When validating a delivery, users with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights can encounter an access error if the delivery belongs to a sale order owned by another salesperson.

## **Steps to reproduce:**
- Install sale_subscription_stock.
- Create a user with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights.
- Create a sale order as another user.
- Validate the delivery with the restricted user.

## **Solution:**
During _action_done(), [This line](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/sale_subscription_stock/models/stock_picking.py#L45) is checking subscription_state. Since the user does not have read access to the sale order, reading this field raises an access error and prevents the delivery from being validated. As the method only needs to read the subscription state, access the field with sudo() to avoid the unnecessary access error while preserving the existing business logic.

Runbot Video : [Video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7U2jTCxaaVk2YJcy3bi2SlYuT-yXMsu/view?usp=drive_link) 

OPW - 6295712

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122420

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Install the Accounting and Contacts modules.
- Enable Quick Encoding for Customer Invoices and Vendor Bills in the company 
  settings.
- Create a new customer: Assign a salesperson.
- Ensure:
  - The salesperson is not a login user.
  - The customer language, salesperson's language, and Login user's language 
    are different. Example:
     - Customer language: English
     - Salesperson language: French
     - Login user language: French
- Create a customer invoice using the Upload Document functionality.
- Select the customer created above.
- Use Quick Edit mode and enter an amount and Click Confirm.

**Issue:**
- When the invoice notification is rendered in a language different from the one
  used during the write operation, the notification rendering flow calls 
  _notify_by_email_prepare_rendering_context().
- During rendering, the code executes:
```
self.tax_totals.get('total_amount_currency', 0)
```
- Since tax_totals is protected, the ORM returns False instead of the expected
  dictionary, leading to:
```
AttributeError: 'bool' object has no attribute 'get'
```

**Root Cause:**
- This issue occurs in Quick Edit mode because tax_totals is [not read-only](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/views/account_move_views.xml#L1359) 
  in Quick Edit mode and is included in [the values](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/web/static/src/model/relational_model/record.js#L708) sent by the web client during write().
- During create()/write(), _get_protected_vals() marks tax_totals as protected.
- Since tax_totals is a [@api.depends_context('lang')](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L975) computed field, it 
  maintains a separate cache per language. [During write()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L3955), the [field becomes 
  protected](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L3863) by [env.protecting()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/odoo/orm/fields.py#L1738). While the protection is still active, the mail 
  notification flow renders the email using the recipient's language. If the 
  corresponding language-specific cache entry for tax_totals is not available, 
  the ORM cannot recompute the protected field and returns False instead 
  of the expected dictionary.

- The rendering code assumes tax_totals is always a dictionary and directly 
  calls  .get(), leading to the crash.

**Solution:**
- Exclude tax_totals from _get_protected_vals().
- tax_totals is already handled explicitly after create()/write(), so protecting 
  it is unnecessary. This allows the field to be recomputed during notification 
  rendering when required.

**Result:**
- Invoice notifications render correctly in all languages.
- No RPC crash occurs when rendering notifications after Quick Edit.

**Runbot reproduction: [video](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5f045efb-37de-40aa-b135-1368b1601d61)**

**opw-6209647**

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266335

## **Issue:**
When validating a delivery, users with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights can encounter an access error if the delivery belongs to a sale order owned by another salesperson.

## **Steps to reproduce:**
- Install sale_subscription_stock.
- Create a user with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights.
- Create a sale order as another user.
- Validate the delivery with the restricted user.

## **Solution:**
During _action_done(), [This line](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/sale_subscription_stock/models/stock_picking.py#L45) is checking subscription_state. Since the user does not have read access to the sale order, reading this field raises an access error and prevents the delivery from being validated. As the method only needs to read the subscription state, access the field with sudo() to avoid the unnecessary access error while preserving the existing business logic.

Runbot Video : [Video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7U2jTCxaaVk2YJcy3bi2SlYuT-yXMsu/view?usp=drive_link) 

OPW - 6295712

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122420

Currently an error occurs when user opens stock report after uninstalling mrp.

Steps to replicate:
- Install mrp.
- Uninstall mrp and open `Stock > Reporting > Stock`.

Error:
```
ValueError: Invalid field product.product.is_kits in condition ('is_kits', '=', False)
```

Cause:
- The `mrp` module overrides the `stock.action_product_stock_view` window action domain with `is_kits` field referenced inside [1].

- When mrp is uninstalled, the `is_kits` field is removed from `product.product` but the overridden action domain remains stored in the database. Opening the action then tries to evaluate a domain referencing a non-existent field, resulting in this error.

Solution:
- Restore the original `stock.action_product_stock_view` domain during mrp uninstallation to remove the `is_kits` condition.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c8390638cae4b4dafb805bc0d3a4149fb5194934/addons/mrp/views/product_views.xml#L164-L166

sentry-7332688253
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269512

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_gt_edi` module and switch to a `GT Company`.
- Create a new vendor bill with:
  - Vendor: GT Company
  - GT Document Type: `FESP`
  - Add taxes `VAT Withholding 12%` and `ISR Withholding 5%` in Invoice lines.
- `Confirm` the bill and `Send to SAT`.
- From the gear icon, click `Download` > `PDF`.

**Error1:**
`KeyError: 'gran_total'`

**Error2:**
`KeyError: 'retencion_grand_total'`

**Root Cause:**
In commit [1], the code at [2] missed calling `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()` 
before `_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()`. However, 
`_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()` uses the `gran_total` value, which is 
initialized by `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()`, resulting in a `KeyError`.

Additionally, the report template at [3] references `retencion_grand_total` 
instead of the correct key `retencion_gran_total`, causing another `KeyError`.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents errors and ensures users can successfully download 
the PDF by applying a fix similar to [4],

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/44afd19e4ed0827e343af0e584c81e579935c9e8

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L305-L328

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/views/report_invoice.xml#L72

[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L790-L800

opw-6323049

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122398
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122030

## Issue
When using the Timesheets systray, if we set a project after clicking the *Save* or *Reset* button, the project is not saved after closing the systray.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Timesheets* (`timesheet_grid`)
2. Open the Timesheets systray
3. Click *Reset* and set a description, a project and/or a task, then close the systray
4. Open the systray again
5. **The description/project/task set in step 3 do(es) not appear anymore.**

## Cause
Commit https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/b9b7f8a0acf7a1c545c6613cf8bbc29871632e26 introduced the `preventUnmountSave` attribute. The attribute is set to `true` after saving and discarding an entry. When the systray is unMounted, the manual values (e.g., description, project and task) are not saved if the attribute is set to `true`:

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cd8dd008eb88d6c12f3e65fb8d311058290a301/timesheet_grid/static/src/components/timesheet_timer_inline_form/timesheet_timer_inline_form.js#L171-L174

## Fix
After discussing with the author of the previous commit, it appears this was done to prevent an issue with values stored in cache, but that issue does not seem to occur anymore, which leads to believe that the attribute is not required anymore.

opw-6284016

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121605

#### Description of the issue this PR addresses:
- When an emoji shortcut ending with `/` (e.g. `:/` for 😕) is typed, the emoji plugin replaces the characters before the powerbox `on_input_handler` runs. Since `ev.data` still reflects the original typed `/`, the powerbox was incorrectly opening.
- Emoji shortcuts works only when it is used at the end of a text node, because the matching logic checked the whole remaining substring from the current position.
- Sometimes, pressing Backspace splits one text node into two, and then an emoji shortcut works at the end of the first text node even when the paragraph is visible as a single line.

#### Desired behavior after PR is merged:
- Check the DOM character at cursor position instead of `ev.data` to determine whether `/` is actually present before opening the powerbox.
- Emoji shortcuts now works when used with a preceding space anywhere in the paragraph.

Enterprise PR-https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/118310
task-6243724

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266284

Issue:
----------------------------------------
The overtime calculation ignores attendances overlapping midnight when creating an attendance on the day they overlap.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have the standard 8 hours per day working schedule
- Use the default overtime ruleset:
    - Quantity, per day, more than the contract
    - Have no rule on weeks
- Create an attendance of 8+ hours overlapping midnight on a day:
    - From 10pm to 10am (2h + 10h = 12h)
- Create another attendance on the day the first ended:
    - From 2pm to 6pm (4h)
- The first attendance has 2h of overtime:
    - 0h from the first worked day (from 10pm to midnight = 2 < 8)
    - 2h on the next day (10h worked from midnight to 10am)
- The second attendance have 0h of overtime even though it should be 4h
    - We only considered this attendance in the calculation, ignoring the 10h worked in the morning

Cause:
----------------------------------------
In `_update_overtime()` we create a domain to include all useful attendances in the calculation. As all rules are based on days, the domain will use the date of the attendance to get overlapping attendances. But the date of the attendance is the date of its `check_in` ([src](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4235b48c86077bd5bceb9e817cc45b2eec8697e8/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance.py#L91)). So when creating the second attendance, the domain only fetches attendance with their `date` on the same date as the `check_in` of the second one. This excludes the first one even though it overlaps on the same day.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
Don't use `date` but `check_in` and `check_out` in the domain to really get all attendances overlapping a day with an updated attendance.

As this domain was used on both `hr.attendance` and `hr.attendance.overtime.line`, we adapt it so it uses the correct fields (`time_start` and `time_stop`) from the overtime lines.

opw-6253777

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272447

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Documents app
- Upload a sound file (mp3 for example, but the
    behavior is the same for other formats)
- Share the document and copy the link
- Log out
- Paste the link
- Click on preview button
- Media is working fine on Firefox
- Media won't read on Chrome
```
Loading media from '' violates the following Content Security Policy directive: "default-src 'none'".
Note that 'media-src' was not explicitly set, so 'default-src' is used as a fallback.
The action has been blocked.
```

**Issue:**
Since [1] default CSP Headers are too strict for Chrome default media rendering, which breaks the file preview (and force user download).

This only impacts Chrome as they seem to render generate `<video><source>` elements to render the file which triggers a secondary request and fails due to the CSP constraint.

**Fix:**
Could re-apply the header fix of 17.4 (see [2]), but it seems better to block the preview of audio files as well by default (to match how we manage videos).

(Note: we don't want to be used as a media streaming platform)

[1] (set csp to none by default) https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/64beb80205dffe4b432c8b5813a3271b073fa85e
[2] (similar issue which was not fixed in 18.0+) https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/a7af78eeb2b9763045a5bda8714172f5e7402df8
[3] (mp4 preview removed) https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/ea88cf7c6d5f077b60fb59347659507fded0e2fe

opw-6235043

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119644

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Accounting

- Create an invoice:
  * Customer: Partner A
  * Total: 30.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Create a second invoice for the same customer:
  * Customer: Partner A
  * Total; 10.00
- Confirm the invoice

- From the invoice list, select both invoice
- Create payment:
  * Journal: Bank
  * Group Payments: [checked]
  * Group Payments: [checked]
  * Amount: 40.00

- Create a third invoice for another customer:
  * Customer: Partner B
  * Total: 25.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Register payment from the invoice

- Create a fourth invoice for another customer:
  * Customer: Partner C
  * Total; 40.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Register payment from the invoice

- From the payment list, select all 3 payments and create batch payment
- Validate the batch payment

- From Accounting dashboard, open Bank journal
- Create a new bank statement line of 105.00
- Match it with the batch payment

At that point, the statement line is reconciled with the 4 invoices and the 3 payments are marked as paid.

- Go to the fourth invoice
- Reset it to draft
- Change the price
- Save

When the amount of the invoice is changed, the statement line is unreconciled and all the payments should change state from "Paid" to "In Process".

**Issue:**
All the single payments have their state correctly changed to "In Process", except for the group payment for the 2 first invoices, which leads to undesired values when trying to reconcile the statement line with the batch payment again.

**Cause:**
When the statement is unreconciled, all the partial reconcile records are deleted and the state of the linked payments are updated to "In Process".
The payments are retrieved by checking if there are linked to an account move present in the partial reconcile record and if the amount of the payment matches the amount of the partial reconcile record. In case of a group payment, there are 2 partial reconcile records for each invoice linked to the payment.
Therefore, in that case, the amount doesn't match the amount of the payment because it matches the amount of one of the invoice.

opw-6141089

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122195
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120210

**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Install the Accounting and Contacts modules.
- Enable Quick Encoding for Customer Invoices and Vendor Bills in the company 
  settings.
- Create a new customer: Assign a salesperson.
- Ensure:
  - The salesperson is not a login user.
  - The customer language, salesperson's language, and Login user's language 
    are different. Example:
     - Customer language: English
     - Salesperson language: French
     - Login user language: French
- Create a customer invoice using the Upload Document functionality.
- Select the customer created above.
- Use Quick Edit mode and enter an amount and Click Confirm.

**Issue:**
- When the invoice notification is rendered in a language different from the one
  used during the write operation, the notification rendering flow calls 
  _notify_by_email_prepare_rendering_context().
- During rendering, the code executes:
```
self.tax_totals.get('total_amount_currency', 0)
```
- Since tax_totals is protected, the ORM returns False instead of the expected
  dictionary, leading to:
```
AttributeError: 'bool' object has no attribute 'get'
```

**Root Cause:**
- This issue occurs in Quick Edit mode because tax_totals is [not read-only](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/views/account_move_views.xml#L1359) 
  in Quick Edit mode and is included in [the values](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/web/static/src/model/relational_model/record.js#L708) sent by the web client during write().
- During create()/write(), _get_protected_vals() marks tax_totals as protected.
- Since tax_totals is a [@api.depends_context('lang')](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L975) computed field, it 
  maintains a separate cache per language. [During write()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L3955), the [field becomes 
  protected](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L3863) by [env.protecting()](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1f7a62d38303a992f501b4ecdb1bee437f7279b8/odoo/orm/fields.py#L1738). While the protection is still active, the mail 
  notification flow renders the email using the recipient's language. If the 
  corresponding language-specific cache entry for tax_totals is not available, 
  the ORM cannot recompute the protected field and returns False instead 
  of the expected dictionary.

- The rendering code assumes tax_totals is always a dictionary and directly 
  calls  .get(), leading to the crash.

**Solution:**
- Exclude tax_totals from _get_protected_vals().
- tax_totals is already handled explicitly after create()/write(), so protecting 
  it is unnecessary. This allows the field to be recomputed during notification 
  rendering when required.

**Result:**
- Invoice notifications render correctly in all languages.
- No RPC crash occurs when rendering notifications after Quick Edit.

**Runbot reproduction: [video](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5f045efb-37de-40aa-b135-1368b1601d61)**

**opw-6209647**

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266335

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Accounting

- Create an invoice:
  * Customer: Partner A
  * Total: 30.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Create a second invoice for the same customer:
  * Customer: Partner A
  * Total; 10.00
- Confirm the invoice

- From the invoice list, select both invoice
- Create payment:
  * Journal: Bank
  * Group Payments: [checked]
  * Amount: 40.00

- Create a third invoice for another customer:
  * Customer: Partner B
  * Total: 25.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Register payment from the invoice

- Create a fourth invoice for another customer:
  * Customer: Partner C
  * Total; 40.00
- Confirm the invoice
- Register payment from the invoice

- From the payment list, select all 3 payments and create batch payment
- Validate the batch payment

- From Accounting dashboard, open Bank journal
- Create a new bank statement line of 105.00
- Match it with the batch payment

At that point, the statement line is reconciled with the 4 invoices and the 3 payments are marked as paid.

- Go to the fourth invoice
- Reset it to draft
- Change the price
- Save

When the amount of the invoice is changed, the statement line is unreconciled and all the payments should change state from "Paid" to "In Process".

**Issue:**
All the single payments have their state correctly changed to "In Process", except for the group payment for the 2 first invoices, which leads to undesired values when trying to reconcile the statement line with the batch payment again.

**Cause:**
When the statement is unreconciled, all the partial reconcile records are deleted and the state of the linked payments are updated to "In Process".
The payments are retrieved by checking if there are linked to an account move present in the partial reconcile record and if the amount of the payment matches the amount of the partial reconcile record. In case of a group payment, there are 2 partial reconcile records for each invoice linked to the payment.
Therefore, in that case, the amount doesn't match the amount of the payment because it matches the amount of one of the invoice.

opw-6141089




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272954
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269510

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_gt_edi` module and switch to a `GT Company`.
- Create a new vendor bill with:
  - Vendor: GT Company
  - GT Document Type: `FESP`
  - Add taxes `VAT Withholding 12%` and `ISR Withholding 5%` in Invoice lines.
- `Confirm` the bill and `Send to SAT`.
- From the gear icon, click `Download` > `PDF`.

**Error1:**
`KeyError: 'gran_total'`

**Error2:**
`KeyError: 'retencion_grand_total'`

**Root Cause:**
In commit [1], the code at [2] missed calling `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()` 
before `_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()`. However, 
`_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()` uses the `gran_total` value, which is 
initialized by `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()`, resulting in a `KeyError`.

Additionally, the report template at [3] references `retencion_grand_total` 
instead of the correct key `retencion_gran_total`, causing another `KeyError`.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents errors and ensures users can successfully download 
the PDF by applying a fix similar to [4],

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/44afd19e4ed0827e343af0e584c81e579935c9e8

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L305-L328

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/views/report_invoice.xml#L72

[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L790-L800

opw-6323049

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122398
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122030

[FIX] stock,*: properly compute forecast availability after PO resupply scrap
* : mrp_subcontracting_purchase

# How to reproduce
- Enable Subcontracting in the settings
- Create Product A with :
	- Quantity : > 0
	- Routes : Buy & Resupply Subcontractor on Order
- Create Product B
- Create BOM for that Product with
	- BOM Type : Subcontracting
	- Subcontractors : any
	- Component : Product A
- Create a PO for Product B
- Confirm the PO Order
- Use the Resupply smart button
- Click on the gear icons > Scrap
- Scrap Product A

# The problem
A traceback will appear.

# Cause
There are two main ways to get the picking type's code of a move. Either :

- `product_code` which is a related field to `picking_id.picking_type_id.code` :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L174

- `picking_type_id.code` where `picking_type_id` is a computed field :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L283-L287

When we scrap the products, we call the `do_scrap()` function that creates a new
scrap move :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_scrap.py#L158

When we do so, the create move's `picking_code` wil be the code of the picking type
of the current picking (The subcontractor resupply) :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_scrap.py#L151

But `picking_type_id.code` will be different because there is a
`default_picking_type_id` value set in the context by :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order.py#L223

In our case, theses values end up not being the same. Later, when we compute the forecast
information of the move, we prefetch virtual available keys and put the moves in a dict
based on those keys.
The computation of the virtual available key is based on the `picking_code` of the move :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L488-L490
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L496-L499

When later we try to fetch back the move, we compute the virtual available key based on
`picking_type_id.code` :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0442c66d26b0c23313f17c566b16e34e7b22c2b6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L529-L536

But since `picking_code` and `picking_type_id.code` are different, the output
`key_virtual_available` is also different. Essentially, we add the move in the
dict with key A and then try to fetch it back using key B, which gives us a KeyError.

opw-6145887

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272171
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263799

## **Issue:**
When validating a delivery, users with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights can encounter an access error if the delivery belongs to a sale order owned by another salesperson.

## **Steps to reproduce:**
- Install sale_subscription_stock.
- Create a user with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights.
- Create a sale order as another user.
- Validate the delivery with the restricted user.

## **Solution:**
During _action_done(), [This line](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/sale_subscription_stock/models/stock_picking.py#L45) is checking subscription_state. Since the user does not have read access to the sale order, reading this field raises an access error and prevents the delivery from being validated. As the method only needs to read the subscription state, access the field with sudo() to avoid the unnecessary access error while preserving the existing business logic.

Runbot Video : [Video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7U2jTCxaaVk2YJcy3bi2SlYuT-yXMsu/view?usp=drive_link) 

OPW - 6295712

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122420

Currently an error occurs when user opens stock report after uninstalling mrp.

Steps to replicate:
- Install mrp.
- Uninstall mrp and open `Stock > Reporting > Stock`.

Error:
```
ValueError: Invalid field product.product.is_kits in condition ('is_kits', '=', False)
```

Cause:
- The `mrp` module overrides the `stock.action_product_stock_view` window action domain with `is_kits` field referenced inside [1].

- When mrp is uninstalled, the `is_kits` field is removed from `product.product` but the overridden action domain remains stored in the database. Opening the action then tries to evaluate a domain referencing a non-existent field, resulting in this error.

Solution:
- Restore the original `stock.action_product_stock_view` domain during mrp uninstallation to remove the `is_kits` condition.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c8390638cae4b4dafb805bc0d3a4149fb5194934/addons/mrp/views/product_views.xml#L164-L166

sentry-7332688253
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269512

Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_in_reports` module(Indian Localisation)
- Create a branch in `IN Company` > Select both
- Create separate invoices for each company
- Created the GSTR-1 report for both company
- While generating Excel, select only main company

Traceback:
```py
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 2537, in action_generate_gstr1_xlsx
gstr1_json = self._get_l10n_in_gstr1_json()
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 1071, in _get_l10n_in_gstr1_json
'b2cs': _get_b2cs_json(AccountMoveLine.search(self._get_section_domain('b2cs'))),
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 672, in _get_b2cs_json
for line, line_tax_details in tax_details.items():
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'items'
```

Cause:
This issue occurs because, while generating the GSTR-1 Excel report for a particular month, [journal_items] contains account moves from both companies. This happens because the [domain] fetches records for both companies, resulting in move [lines] from both companies being included.

However, while generating the Excel report, only one company is selected. As a result, [tax_details_by_move] does not contain the move data for the branch company, which returns None, causing the error to be raised.

Solution:
Pass an empty `{}` for `tax_details` when only a single company is selected.

[journal_items]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L877 
[domain]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/770ffaac14bfcd2c54a7ce6aca27e0010e7884d4/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L1387-L1393 
[lines]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L1074 
[tax_details_by_move]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L880

opw-6242824

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118614

Currently an error occurs when user opens stock report after uninstalling mrp.

Steps to replicate:
- Install mrp.
- Uninstall mrp and open `Stock > Reporting > Stock`.

Error:
```
ValueError: Invalid field product.product.is_kits in condition ('is_kits', '=', False)
```

Cause:
- The `mrp` module overrides the `stock.action_product_stock_view` window action domain with `is_kits` field referenced inside [1].

- When mrp is uninstalled, the `is_kits` field is removed from `product.product` but the overridden action domain remains stored in the database. Opening the action then tries to evaluate a domain referencing a non-existent field, resulting in this error.

Solution:
- Restore the original `stock.action_product_stock_view` domain during mrp uninstallation to remove the `is_kits` condition.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c8390638cae4b4dafb805bc0d3a4149fb5194934/addons/mrp/views/product_views.xml#L164-L166

sentry-7332688253
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269512

## **Issue:**
When validating a delivery, users with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights can encounter an access error if the delivery belongs to a sale order owned by another salesperson.

## **Steps to reproduce:**
- Install sale_subscription_stock.
- Create a user with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights.
- Create a sale order as another user.
- Validate the delivery with the restricted user.

## **Solution:**
During _action_done(), [This line](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/sale_subscription_stock/models/stock_picking.py#L45) is checking subscription_state. Since the user does not have read access to the sale order, reading this field raises an access error and prevents the delivery from being validated. As the method only needs to read the subscription state, access the field with sudo() to avoid the unnecessary access error while preserving the existing business logic.

Runbot Video : [Video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7U2jTCxaaVk2YJcy3bi2SlYuT-yXMsu/view?usp=drive_link) 

OPW - 6295712

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122420

## Issue
In the attendance view of an employee, a recap of the current extra hours is displayed, showing four values:
1. Total Extra Hours Worked
2. Total Compensable Extra Hours
3. Time Off Taken from Extra Hours
4. Remaining Extra Hours

Each of the above values can be negative but the last one, which can seem odd as it appears to be calculated from the other values.

<img width="299" height="168" alt="6293174-before" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4377e2fd-f5f2-41a4-a82b-6f2598378499" />

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *HR Attendance Holidays* (`hr_holidays_attendance`)
2. In Settings, toggle *Absence Management* and *Display Extra Hours*
3. For an employee E:
    - In the Payroll tab, set the Working Hours to the *Standard 40 hours/week* schedule
    - In the Settings tab, set the Overtime Ruleset to the *Default Ruleset*, and toggle the *Give back as time off* action for the *Employee Schedule Rule* rule
4. Create an attendance for employee E:
    - Any day where they are expected to work 8 hours
    - From 10am to 5pm (6 hours with lunch)
5. In the Employees app, go to employee E and click the *Monthly Hours* smart button
6. __In the *Balance* recap above the list of attendances, the *Remaining Extra Hours* row shows 00:00, which seems wrong compared to the other fields above (*Total Extra Hours Worked* and *Total Compensable Extra Hours*) which appear negative.__

## Cause
The `unspent_overtime` (*Remaining Extra Hours* in the balance recap) is computed by adding positive values, making it strictly positive.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/30c9e8c5b1e34b94c8aab8681e2c051a3b70f013/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/models/hr_employee.py#L62-L65

This was added by https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/2144bcfba1ac53c82fc7f2870a72bb13abee97e4, with no justification on why this value needs to be positive.

## Impact on "Time Off taken from Extra Hours"
Before this change, after following the above steps, a value of `-2:00` would be displayed in the *Time Off Taken from Extra Hours* row. This is no longer the case after this fix, since the `'unspent_compensable_overtime'` (*Remaining Extra Hours*) value is used to compute that row:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f7fb0a941d6bac39b7057db36f57be079559912c/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/static/src/views/extra_hours_list_view.js#L39-L42

Instead, a value of `00:00` is shown. Before, we were substracting 0 hour of `unspent_compensable_overtime` to the -2 hours of `compensable_overtime`, now we are subectracting -2 hours of `unspent_compensable_overtime` to the same -2 hours of `compensable_overtime`. This is a side effect that was ignored, as it seems to make at least as much sense as showing `-2:00`.

<img width="321" height="179" alt="6293174-after" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/907d5fb8-0c36-4b2e-bca7-1cec41baf22b" />


opw-6293174

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271272

*: mrp_subcontracting_{dropshipping, purchase}

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings: Enable subcontracting, dropshipping
- Create a storable dropshipped product FP with a set vendor for 5$ and subcontracting BOM: 1 X COMP. Value this product in avco perpetual
- Set the component to resupply subcontractor and standard price to 2$
- Create and confirm a sale order for 1 unit fo FP
- Validate the resupply to the subcontractor and then the dropship
> The FP standard price shoul dhave been updated to 5$ + 2$ = 7$
- Create and post a bill from the PO for 10$ rather than 5
#### > The FP standard price should have been updated to 11$ rather than 12$

Cause of the issue:

Posting the bill will call the `_set_value` method to re-evaluate the product in terms of the newly recorded `account.move`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/161715c850496d3683baa5d1600380470d0b5ff5/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L393-L395 Now, the issue is that due to our config, there are two relevant moves linked to the `order_line`: the final move of the subcontracted production (which `is_in`) and the dropship move going from the subcontractor to the customer. When it comes to the subcontracted move, it is appropriately valuated at 12$ by the `_get_value_from_account_move` because of this override which adds the components value via the extra cost since the move has a `production_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/161715c850496d3683baa5d1600380470d0b5ff5/addons/mrp_subcontracting_purchase/models/stock_move.py#L14-L38 However, the dropship move will not add this extra cost (as no override sets it to have the same value as the subcontracted production it comes from) so that this move is valuated at 10$. This explains why the value of the avco product is then updated to 11$ since (12 + 10) /2 = 11

Note that the issue is not reproducible in the case of regular subcontracting since in that case the receipt from `subcontractor` to `stock` is not valuated.

opw-6318035

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272813

Issue:
----------------------------------------
The overtime calculation ignores attendances overlapping midnight when creating an attendance on the day they overlap.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have the standard 8 hours per day working schedule
- Use the default overtime ruleset:
    - Quantity, per day, more than the contract
    - Have no rule on weeks
- Create an attendance of 8+ hours overlapping midnight on a day:
    - From 10pm to 10am (2h + 10h = 12h)
- Create another attendance on the day the first ended:
    - From 2pm to 6pm (4h)
- The first attendance has 2h of overtime:
    - 0h from the first worked day (from 10pm to midnight = 2 < 8)
    - 2h on the next day (10h worked from midnight to 10am)
- The second attendance have 0h of overtime even though it should be 4h
    - We only considered this attendance in the calculation, ignoring the 10h worked in the morning

Cause:
----------------------------------------
In `_update_overtime()` we create a domain to include all useful attendances in the calculation. As all rules are based on days, the domain will use the date of the attendance to get overlapping attendances. But the date of the attendance is the date of its `check_in` ([src](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/4235b48c86077bd5bceb9e817cc45b2eec8697e8/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance.py#L91)). So when creating the second attendance, the domain only fetches attendance with their `date` on the same date as the `check_in` of the second one. This excludes the first one even though it overlaps on the same day.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
Don't use `date` but `check_in` and `check_out` in the domain to really get all attendances overlapping a day with an updated attendance.

As this domain was used on both `hr.attendance` and `hr.attendance.overtime.line`, we adapt it so it uses the correct fields (`time_start` and `time_stop`) from the overtime lines.

opw-6253777

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272447

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Documents app
- Upload a sound file (mp3 for example, but the
    behavior is the same for other formats)
- Share the document and copy the link
- Log out
- Paste the link
- Click on preview button
- Media is working fine on Firefox
- Media won't read on Chrome
```
Loading media from '' violates the following Content Security Policy directive: "default-src 'none'".
Note that 'media-src' was not explicitly set, so 'default-src' is used as a fallback.
The action has been blocked.
```

**Issue:**
Since [1] default CSP Headers are too strict for Chrome default media rendering, which breaks the file preview (and force user download).

This only impacts Chrome as they seem to render generate `<video><source>` elements to render the file which triggers a secondary request and fails due to the CSP constraint.

**Fix:**
Could re-apply the header fix of 17.4 (see [2]), but it seems better to block the preview of audio files as well by default (to match how we manage videos).

(Note: we don't want to be used as a media streaming platform)

[1] (set csp to none by default) https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/64beb80205dffe4b432c8b5813a3271b073fa85e
[2] (similar issue which was not fixed in 18.0+) https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/a7af78eeb2b9763045a5bda8714172f5e7402df8
[3] (mp4 preview removed) https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/ea88cf7c6d5f077b60fb59347659507fded0e2fe

opw-6235043

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119644

In certain cases the barcode of a product could be a valid standalone 
GS1 sequence. In that case it needs to be be correctly interpreted as 
a product scan.

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable "Default GS1 Nomenclature"
- Create a storable product P with the barcode 3701762412212
- Create and confirm a  delivery for 2 units of P and set the qty to 2
- Go to the barcode app and open your delivery
- Scan 3701762412212
> The line of P is now selected with a quantity of 1/2
- Scan 3701762412212
#### > A new line is created for 1762411 units

### Cause of the issue:

According to the GS1 nomenclature, the barcode 3701762412212 matches the scan of a quantity of "1762412" units of the lot name "2". As the scan of the of the product match a pattern for the GS1 nomenclature before matching a product, its barcode data is expected to be reset by these lines:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1320-L1324
In order to bypass the GS1 parser and to add 1 unit of the product. This is what happen on the first scan. However, performing the first scan also selects the associated line and, hence on the second scan the lines just above this check do set the product to match the product of the current line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1294-L1320
In particular, we do not bypass the result provided by the GS1 parser and add `1762412` units of the product.

opw-6175621

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122256
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120035

## The Problem

Validating receipts with a large number of operations by creating a backorder was timing out due to $O(N*M)$ filtering inside `_get_qty_received_without_self`, where N is the number of moves in the picking, and M is the number of moves being processed for valuation.

This happened while computing price units for moves one by one: each move filtered all picking moves to find the ones with the same `product_id`.

Another issue was a PostgreSQL `"memory exhausted"` error caused by generating a large number of OR'ed conditions, equal to the number of processed moves.

## The Solution

The massive filtering was fixed by filtering moves of the `purchase_line` instead of the `picking`, which is typically associated with only a few moves. This is still correct as the loop just after already ignores moves that don't have the same `purchase_line_id` of `self` anyways.


The PostgreSQL error was fixed by grouping moves by `location_dest_id` and generating one condition per location using an `in` clause, which is typically much smaller than generating one condition per move.

## Benchmark

Benchmark on a customer database, validating a receipt with 10k+ operations by creating a backorder:

```text
Time: timeout -> 6 min
```

OPW-6272667

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272603
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269350

Since 17.0, `webp` images can be uploaded at any resolution, whereas every other format is refused above IMAGE_MAX_RESOLUTION (50 Mpx) when the attachment is created on the server.

Root cause
===========
`ImageProcess` grouped webp together with empty sources and SVG and set `self.image = False`, returning before the `verify_resolution` check. As a result the resolution limit enforced for `png/jpeg/...` was never applied to `webp`.

Fix
===
Split `webp` out of the skip branch: it is still not processed as before, but its resolution is now read from the RIFF header with `get_webp_size()` and checked against `IMAGE_MAX_RESOLUTION`, so oversized webp images are refused on upload like any other format.

Steps to reproduce
===================
1. Edit any page with the website editor
2. Upload a `webp` image larger than 50 Mpx (e.g. 8000x8000)

=> The image is accepted, while a `png/jpeg` of the same size is refused

task-4134430

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273140
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273010

When uploading a font file "FontName 123 Light.otf" the baseFontName needs to be quoted in the font-face CSS to be valid.

Single font files parsing for the shortestNamedFont now also correctly keeps the weight for the targetFonts.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
Uploaded fonts with spaces in the name are not working.

Current behavior before PR:
When uploading a font with a space in the filename like  "FontName 123 Light.otf" the css declaration in the attachement is wrong and not working:
```css
@font-face {
	font-family: FontName 123 Light;
	font-style: normal;
	font-weight: 400;
	src: url("/web/content/1057/FontName 123 Light.otf");
}@font-face {
	font-family: FontName 123 Light;
	font-style: normal;
	font-weight: 400;
	src: url("/web/content/1057/FontName 123 Light.otf");
}
```

Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The font name is now correctly quoted and the font attributes are no longer overwritten for the shortestNameFont:
```css
@font-face {
	font-family: "FontName 123 Light";
	font-style: normal;
	font-weight: 400;
	src: url("/web/content/1057/FontName 123 Light.otf");
}@font-face {
	font-family: "FontName 123 Light";
	font-style: normal;
	font-weight: 300;
	src: url("/web/content/1057/FontName 123 Light.otf");
}
```

Info @wt-io-it

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268842

In certain cases the barcode of a product could be a valid standalone 
GS1 sequence. In that case it needs to be be correctly interpreted as 
a product scan.

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable "Default GS1 Nomenclature"
- Create a storable product P with the barcode 3701762412212
- Create and confirm a  delivery for 2 units of P and set the qty to 2
- Go to the barcode app and open your delivery
- Scan 3701762412212
> The line of P is now selected with a quantity of 1/2
- Scan 3701762412212
#### > A new line is created for 1762411 units

### Cause of the issue:

According to the GS1 nomenclature, the barcode 3701762412212 matches the scan of a quantity of "1762412" units of the lot name "2". As the scan of the of the product match a pattern for the GS1 nomenclature before matching a product, its barcode data is expected to be reset by these lines:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1320-L1324
In order to bypass the GS1 parser and to add 1 unit of the product. This is what happen on the first scan. However, performing the first scan also selects the associated line and, hence on the second scan the lines just above this check do set the product to match the product of the current line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1294-L1320
In particular, we do not bypass the result provided by the GS1 parser and add `1762412` units of the product.

opw-6175621

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122256
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120035

When a customer books through Reserve with Google, the createBooking payload carries the booker given_name and family_name next to the email, but the handler passed only the normalized email to _mail_find_partner_from_emails. The new res.partner was therefore created with its name falling back to the email, see
 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/aa7b5921191a0ff53ef1cc32af99fe458c45c0da/addons/mail/models/res_partner.py#L177

That name then flows into the calendar.event name, the attendee common_name and the contact details, all showing the email instead of the customer name. The module has read neither field since it was added in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/2e855b910173b56e8501d0ebe9ee6f83ac5845bc.

Build the booker name from given_name and family_name and pass it with the email through formataddr in google_reserve_booking_create, so a newly created partner is named after the customer. A partner matched on an existing email keeps its current name.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Enable Reserve with Google on an appointment type.
2. Book a slot from Google Maps with given name John and family name Doe.
3. Open the created booking and its contact in Odoo.

=> the contact name is the email instead of John Doe

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6232318)
opw-6232318

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120604

Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_in_reports` module(Indian Localisation)
- Create a branch in `IN Company` > Select both
- Create separate invoices for each company
- Created the GSTR-1 report for both company
- While generating Excel, select only main company

Traceback:
```py
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 2537, in action_generate_gstr1_xlsx
gstr1_json = self._get_l10n_in_gstr1_json()
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 1071, in _get_l10n_in_gstr1_json
'b2cs': _get_b2cs_json(AccountMoveLine.search(self._get_section_domain('b2cs'))),
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/19.0/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py", line 672, in _get_b2cs_json
for line, line_tax_details in tax_details.items():
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'items'
```

Cause:
This issue occurs because, while generating the GSTR-1 Excel report for a particular month, [journal_items] contains account moves from both companies. This happens because the [domain] fetches records for both companies, resulting in move [lines] from both companies being included.

However, while generating the Excel report, only one company is selected. As a result, [tax_details_by_move] does not contain the move data for the branch company, which returns None, causing the error to be raised.

Solution:
Pass an empty `{}` for `tax_details` when only a single company is selected.

[journal_items]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L877 
[domain]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/770ffaac14bfcd2c54a7ce6aca27e0010e7884d4/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L1387-L1393 
[lines]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L1074 
[tax_details_by_move]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3c3641d9f0753c1ca62285667c4a2786c15e2444/l10n_in_reports/models/account_return.py#L880

opw-6242824

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118614

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_gt_edi` module and switch to a `GT Company`.
- Create a new vendor bill with:
  - Vendor: GT Company
  - GT Document Type: `FESP`
  - Add taxes `VAT Withholding 12%` and `ISR Withholding 5%` in Invoice lines.
- `Confirm` the bill and `Send to SAT`.
- From the gear icon, click `Download` > `PDF`.

**Error1:**
`KeyError: 'gran_total'`

**Error2:**
`KeyError: 'retencion_grand_total'`

**Root Cause:**
In commit [1], the code at [2] missed calling `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()` 
before `_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()`. However, 
`_l10n_gt_edi_add_withholding_values()` uses the `gran_total` value, which is 
initialized by `_l10n_gt_edi_add_base_values()`, resulting in a `KeyError`.

Additionally, the report template at [3] references `retencion_grand_total` 
instead of the correct key `retencion_gran_total`, causing another `KeyError`.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents errors and ensures users can successfully download 
the PDF by applying a fix similar to [4],

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/44afd19e4ed0827e343af0e584c81e579935c9e8

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L305-L328

[3]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/views/report_invoice.xml#L72

[4]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9846b337cfe1876017c7c2ce3041569d7a2ac03f/l10n_gt_edi/models/account_move.py#L790-L800

opw-6323049

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122398
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122030

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the **l10n_gt_edi** module.
* Configure a Guatemalan company with valid Infile credentials in the settings.
* Create a product or customer with special characters (e.g. `ñ`, `á`, `é`) in their name.
* Create a customer invoice containing this product/customer.
* Confirm the invoice to trigger the EDI send to the SAT (Infile).

**Observed behavior:**
* Infile intermittently rejects the invoice due to validation errors, or accepts it but the resulting certified XML has truncated or malformed text exactly where the special characters were located.

**Cause:**
* Odoo uses the `requests.post()` library to send the XML payload to Infile. By default, `requests` encodes string payloads using `latin-1` unless told otherwise.
* Because the request was missing the explicit `Content-Type: application/xml` header and the XML string was not explicitly encoded to `utf-8` before sending, Infile parsed the payload using an incorrect encoding. This caused it to drop or misinterpret special characters, leading to validation failures or corrupted XML content.

**Fix:**
* Explicitly include the `'Content-Type': 'application/xml'` header in the request to Infile.
* Explicitly encode the `xml_data` payload to `utf-8` (`xml_data.encode('utf-8')`) before passing it to `requests.post()` to guarantee the correct encoding is sent over the wire.

opw-6315654

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121729

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Install l10n_ke_edi_oscu_pos.
2. Select the Kenyan company.
3. Enable eTIMS on the PoS.
4. Register the products inside a combo, but not the combo itself.
5. Sell the combo in the PoS.

Observation
-----------
We see a warning that the combo must be registered to eTIMS, and the order can't be validated.

What's happening
----------------
In the PoS a combo adds a 0 price parent line for the combo product, but the combo is not a real item to send to eTIMS, only the products inside it are, and (as per step 4) the combo is not registered.

`checkEtimsFields` sees the combo as not registered, so it raises the warning in `showUnregisteredProductsWarning` and blocks the payment in `validateOrder`.

Fix
---
In the backend, we skip sending the parent combo line to eTIMS, and on the frontend, we make the combo parent line not need eTIMS registration, so the warning and the block don't apply to it.

opw-6253306

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122179
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119362

## **Issue:**
When validating a delivery, users with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights can encounter an access error if the delivery belongs to a sale order owned by another salesperson.

## **Steps to reproduce:**
- Install sale_subscription_stock.
- Create a user with Sales: Own Documents Only and Inventory Administrator access rights.
- Create a sale order as another user.
- Validate the delivery with the restricted user.

## **Solution:**
During _action_done(), [This line](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/19.0/sale_subscription_stock/models/stock_picking.py#L45) is checking subscription_state. Since the user does not have read access to the sale order, reading this field raises an access error and prevents the delivery from being validated. As the method only needs to read the subscription state, access the field with sudo() to avoid the unnecessary access error while preserving the existing business logic.

Runbot Video : [Video](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7U2jTCxaaVk2YJcy3bi2SlYuT-yXMsu/view?usp=drive_link) 

OPW - 6295712

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122420

Issue:
----------------------------------------
When changing multiple times the hours of a slot to include out-of-schedule time.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have planning_field_service installed
- Have an employee with a schedule from 7am to 3pm
- In planning view, create a new slot for this employee from 7am to 3pm (8h)
- Change the starting hour to 6am (8h + 1h of break time)
- Change it back to 7am
- The slot shows 7h07 of allocated hours and 53 minutes of break time

Cause:
----------------------------------------
Since 8ca9faabfdf7d15883ba52da47bd8c562cf601de the compute of `allocated_percentage` is overriden in `planning_field_service`. The new compute uses `break_time` to recompute `allocated_percentage`. `break_time` is the not work time over the whole duration of the slot, including hours out of schedule.

But the definition of `allocated_percentage` in `planning` is: the percentage of slot hours in schedule which are actually worked. So when changing the start to 6am `allocated_percentage` is still supposed ot be 100% because the employee is working 100% of the hours he is supposed to work considering its schedule.

With the actual code `allocated_percentage` is actually computed as 8/9 = 0.88888... because it will take into account the hours out of schedule.

As `allocated_percentage` is not recomputed if `allocated_hours` or `break_time` aren't modified by the user. It is then used [here](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ae5008bdaf1b87269083f82280c7df44390129ff/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L2865-L2867) to compute the allocated_hours and the number of hours in schedule is divided base onthe percentage.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
We only consider the hours in schedule to recompute `allocated_percentage`.

`allocated_percentage` was used in `_onchange_break_time()` to get the previous ratio and calculate the allocated hours from which we deduct the break time. We cannot do this now so we also need to compute the working hours.

-----------------------------------------

# [FIX] planning_field_service: handle input of negative break_time

Issue:
----------------------------------------
When inputting negative break_time for a slot, it's possible to get a traceback.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have planning_field_service installed
- Have an employee with a schedule from 7am to 3pm
- In planning view, create a new slot for this employee from 7am to 3pm (8h)
- Input 9h of break time
- Input -1h of break time
- Traceback

Cause:
----------------------------------------
When `slot.allocated_hours` is 0 and we input a negative value in `break_time`, the code in `_onchange_break_time()` will give `allocated_hours` the positive value of `break_time` making them opposite.

Then in [`_compute_allocated_percentage()`](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/188dcc5078be7c7fee1a52f86505144d3b6309cf/planning_field_service/models/planning_slot.py#L98) we divide by their sum, which equals 0.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
We compute the divider part and check if it's zero in `_compute_allocated_percentage()`.

Also add a `max()` in `_onchange_break_time()` to convert the negative break time in allocated hours and resets `break_time` to zero.
This ensures the same behavior as inputting negative values in `allocated_hours`.

opw-6273559

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122279
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121168

Issue:
----------------------------------------
The Planning / Timesheets Analysis report doesn't include most of the planning slots if they have a calendar based on duration.

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
- Have a 1 day planning slot (8h-17h) for an employee with a calendar based on duration.
- Planning > Reporting > Planning / Timesheets Analysis
- The slot is not included in the report

Cause:
----------------------------------------
The update of how calendars work in saas-19.2 included the `duration_based` option but the query was not adapted. It still checks if the slot start time is lower than the calendar end time on that day:

```sql
F.start_datetime < (d.date::date + (A.hour_to || ' hour')::interval)
AND F.end_datetime > (d.date::date + (A.hour_from || ' hour')::interval)
```

But for duration-based calendars `hour_from` and `hour_to` are stored as `0.0`. So `F.start_datetime < (d.date::date + (A.hour_to || ' hour')::interval)` evaluates to False.

Solution:
----------------------------------------
If the calendar has `duration_based` to True we only check the date.

opw-6217643

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122173
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118133

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------------
1. Install Planning.
2. Create a full day shift (8h) for an employee with a fully fixed schedule.
3. Publish the shift.
4. Go to Actions > Preview and observe the shift.

Current behavior and issue:
------------------------------------
**Shift Splitting:** The system fetches [attendance_intervals](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/6318e5cc392324ed43f3d34cf3f1282f055a5b3e/planning/controllers/main.py#L122) based on the employee's working
schedule and cuts the shift into multiple segments (e.g., splitting a full-day shift to exclude lunch time).

**Incorrect Start/End Time:** The preview displays shift starting times based on the working
schedule rather than the specific times defined during shift creation.

**Timezone Discrepancy:** When a normal shift (e.g., 11 AM to 12 PM) is created,
it is stored in UTC based on the current user's timezone. However, the preview
calculation attempts to convert this value to the [employee's timezone](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2a97fd904d618b123500920c082e8e5537d27e56/planning/controllers/main.py#L58), leading
to a visual offset if the user and employee are in different regions.

Expected behavior:
------------------------
1. Full-day shifts should be displayed as a single continuous block and
should not be cut based on work intervals/attendance.
2. The previewed shift time should exactly match the created shift time.

opw-5913944

**Before fix:**
<img width="1372" height="738" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7dbbf161-85c3-440d-bd4f-9d481656e016" />

**After fix:**
<img width="1458" height="875" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6e058468-aebc-438a-a7c3-3fb9b5c2eda8" />

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install Appointments, create an Appointment Type scheduled based on Resources and add 3 resources.
2. Uncheck "Manage Capacities" on the Appointment configuration.
3. Set 3 simultaneous appointments per resource.
4. Click on Share and open the given link in a new tab.
5. Attempt to book 3 appointments for the same slot in the portal.

Issue:
 - If you click the Appointments smart button in the Appointment form, you will find each booking assgined to one of the resources

Expected:
 - All 3 bookings should be assigned to the first resource

Why this happens:
- A recent performance optimization (9a48e80a3382bb4895013ae6b9b28e2827ac90aa) introduced batch resource checking via `_slot_available_resources`.
- Inside its filter logic, the block evaluating unshareable resources was compressed into `not (self.manage_capacity and resource.shareable)`.
- When `manage_capacity` is False, the resulting evaluation of that block of code marks the resource as unavailable, so the next resource was picked for the following appointment.
- Before the optimization, the equivalent block explicitly returned True if `manage_capacity` was disabled

opw-6344712

## Issue
With a Mexican company, creating a payslip for a duration of one week for an employee with a bi-weekly `schedule_pay`, the payslip will account for 15 days.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *"Mexico - Payroll"* (`l10n_mx_hr_payroll`)
2. Using a Mexican company, create a new Employee E:
    - Set a contract (e.g., January 1st to Indefinite)
    - Wage: $1,500.00 / Bi-weekly
3. In Payroll > Payslips > Payslips, create a new Off-Cycle
    - Employee E
    - Period: Any month, from the 8th to the 15th of the month
4. **In the _Worked Days_ tab, 15 days are counted, even though that's more than the period covers.**

## Cause
In the `_get_worked_day_lines` method, the amount of days is taken from `_get_schedule_days` [[1](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L121)], which uses the `l10n_mx_schedule_table` [[2](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L98-L102)] and returns `15` days for a bi-weekly schedule [[3](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/data/hr_rule_parameters_data.xml#L850-L858)]. This does not take into account the period (`date_from`/`date_to`) of the payslip.

For the cases where the period is shorter than the default period (which usually either goes from the 1st to the 15th of the month, or the 16th to the end of the month), we should only consider the days within that period.

\[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L121
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L98-L102
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/l10n_mx_hr_payroll/data/hr_rule_parameters_data.xml#L850-L858

opw-6192639

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings Enable: Multi-steps Routes, Packages
- Put your warehouse in delivery in 2-steps
- On the Pick operation type in the barcode tab disable: "Allow extra products"
- Create two storable products P1 and P2
- On P2 > On hand > Update Quantity > New
- Create a new line in WH/Output with a package POOK for 1 unit
- Create a new internal transfer for 1 unit of P1 using the pick operation type so that the picking goes WH/Stock -> WH/Output
- Set the quantity of the move to 1 unit and go to the barcode app
- Open the Pick > Scan WH-STOCK > Scan P1 > Scan POOK
#### > An error is raised: This package contains extra products and extra products are not allowed on this operation.
#### Expected behavior:
The package should be set as result package.

### Cause of the issue:

In the `_processPackage`, a check that is done to ensure that the package scan will not add extraproduct to the picking if this operation is not allowed:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/5e4c8ecb0c644e21755570ed59cd8f6e9f618c8a/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2024-L2035
Unfortunately, this check is done just before a possible usage of the package as package dest. And, in that case, since we do not try to add any product to the picking the check is irrelevant anyway.

opw-6303969

In certain cases the barcode of a product could be a valid standalone 
GS1 sequence. In that case it needs to be be correctly interpreted as 
a product scan.

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable "Default GS1 Nomenclature"
- Create a storable product P with the barcode 3701762412212
- Create and confirm a  delivery for 2 units of P and set the qty to 2
- Go to the barcode app and open your delivery
- Scan 3701762412212
> The line of P is now selected with a quantity of 1/2
- Scan 3701762412212
#### > A new line is created for 1762411 units

### Cause of the issue:

According to the GS1 nomenclature, the barcode 3701762412212 matches the scan of a quantity of "1762412" units of the lot name "2". As the scan of the of the product match a pattern for the GS1 nomenclature before matching a product, its barcode data is expected to be reset by these lines:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1320-L1324
In order to bypass the GS1 parser and to add 1 unit of the product. This is what happen on the first scan. However, performing the first scan also selects the associated line and, hence on the second scan the lines just above this check do set the product to match the product of the current line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cceddaf086d849b8e2121e1023ef3479397534f/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1294-L1320
In particular, we do not bypass the result provided by the GS1 parser and add `1762412` units of the product.

opw-6175621

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122256
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120035

Currently when the user reverts an inventory adjustment move line with a package the package contains extra line showing negative quantity of the product.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Inventory without demo data
- Settings Enable 'Packages'
- Create a product:
   - Cheese burger
   - On hand > Create a new quant
   - Package: 'Burgerbox' and 'On Hand Quantity`: 1 and save
- Set the On Hand quantity to zero and save
- History > Revert the Inventory adjustment line from WH/stock to Inventory adjustment by selecting it and reverting via actions.
- Products > Packages > BurgerBox

## Observed Behaviour:
After reverting an inventory adjustment that set the product's physical quantity to 0, the package contains two lines for the same product with quantities 1 and -1.

This is inconsistent because a package should not contain a product with a negative quantity.

The package should be restored to its original state and contain only the expected positive quantity.

## Root cause:
When the user reverts the move line, `action_revert_inventory` is called. This method creates the revert move and then marks that move as done at [1].

Marking the move as done subsequently marks all related move lines as done at [2]. During this process, the system first unreserves the quantity from the virtual location / inventory adjustment and then removes the quantity from that location (resulting in a -1 quantity move line at that location). This is performed through `_synchronize_quant`, which is responsible for synchronizing the physical inventory with the move line at [3].

The `_synchronize_quant` method uses the move line's `package_id` when updating the corresponding quant at [4]. As a result, `_update_available_quantity` creates a new quant with the following values at [5]:
```
{
    'product_id': 1,
    'location_id': 14,
    'lot_id': stock.lot(),
    'package_id': 1,
    'owner_id': res.partner(),
    'in_date': datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 22, 12, 42, 11),
    'quantity': -1.0,
}
```
This creates a quant with a negative quantity that is linked to the package because `package_id` is set on the newly created quant. Consequently, the move line with the negative quantity becomes associated with the package.

[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/333c279be7cba9fda17d2818be36f4d96d8cd0f6/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L1016-L1035 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/333c279be7cba9fda17d2818be36f4d96d8cd0f6/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1956 [3]-
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/333c279be7cba9fda17d2818be36f4d96d8cd0f6/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L662-L666 
[4]-
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/333c279be7cba9fda17d2818be36f4d96d8cd0f6/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L678-L687 
[5]-
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/333c279be7cba9fda17d2818be36f4d96d8cd0f6/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L1130-L1143
## Solution:
Remove the source `package_id` when creating revert moves for inventory adjustment locations.

When an inventory adjustment sets a product's quantity to 0, the adjustment is completed without a destination package, meaning the product is effectively removed from the package. Therefore, the corresponding revert move should not retain the package as its source. Keeping the package as the source is inconsistent because package information should not exist on a virtual inventory adjustment location, and the original inventory adjustment removes the product from the package (there is no destination package).

By removing the source `package_id` from the revert move, the system avoids creating negative quants associated with the package during quant synchronization. This also ensures that, after the inventory adjustment is reverted, the quantities of products inside the package are restored correctly and match their state prior to the adjustment.

opw-6285739