Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
1. Install `industry_fsm_sale` and `base_automation` modules
2. Create a product with:
    * Type: Service
    * Create on order: Task
    * Project: Field Service
3. Create an automation rule with:
    * Model: Sales order
    * Trigger: Incoming message
4. Create and confirm a sale order with this product
5. Add another product to the SO via the catalog view:
    * Change the quantity to 2 or more

Observation:
----------------------------------------
Traceback occurs:
```
  File '/home/odoo/src/odoo/addons/base_automation/models/base_automation.py', line 871, in _message_post
    message_sudo = message.sudo().with_context(active_test=False)
AttributeError: 'bool' object has no attribute 'sudo'
```

Root Cause:
----------------------------------------
* Catalog qty change calls `set_fsm_quantity()` method
* Setting `fsm_quantity` triggers its inverse `_inverse_fsm_quantity()`, which writes the new qty to the SOL, but passes `fsm_no_message_post=True` in context to suppress chatter noise
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ac5d670832a5e0db714c0bd056e1406b50bb4c17/industry_fsm_sale/models/product_product.py#L72-L83
* `sale.order.line.write()` detects a qty change on a confirmed order and calls `_update_line_quantity()`, which posts a message on the parent sale order
* FSM's `message_post` override sees the context flag and returns `False`
* When `base_automation` has an `on_message_received` rule on `sale.order`, it wraps `message_post` at registry load time. That wrapper calls `sudo()` on whatever `message_post` returns, Which was `False`

Solution:
----------------------------------------
Return `self.env['mail.message']` (empty recordset) instead of False, it's still falsy, but it's a proper ORM object that `sudo()` can be called on

opw-6276916

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119542

Steps to reproduce

1. install account_accountant and account_batch_payment on a US / USD company
2. enable EUR as a currency. Create an exchange rate for the 1st day of the month of 1.1
3. create a bank journal with currency EUR, call it “Bank EUR”
4. create 2 supplier invoices in EUR, with amounts 100€ and 200€, dated 1st and 2nd day of the month, due date today
5. confirm the supplier invoices
6. pay the supplier invoices
7. put the payments in a batch
8. Imagine it’s the night, the cron updating the exchange rates run. Manually create an exchange rate for EUR dated today with value rate = 1.2
9. On the Bank EUR journal, create a transaction of -300€ dated today
10. Open the reconciliation screen for the Bank EUR journal, select the -300€ transaction, and on the batch payment tab, select the batch payment created in step 7
11. Click on the button validate

**Expected result:** the invoices are paid and everything is reconciled, same as if we had selected the 2 invoices on the first tab instead of the batch payment. A journal entry is created on the Exchange Gain/Loss journal for each invoice.

**Actual result:** you get an error message saying that the account move is not balanced.

The problem is caused by the exchange rate used on the payments which is different from the rate on bank transfer. We fix this issue by recomputing the exchange rates on the payments when a batch payment is added to the reconciliation widget. 


Related support ticket: [5164405]

When an employee's Income Stream Type is changed after a payslip has been created,
computing the sheet for payslip will raise a traceback.

Steps to reproduce the  error:
- Install ``l10n_au_hr_payroll_account`` module with demo data
- Switch to ``My Australian Company`` company
- Create a new payslip for ``Dennis Cactus`` Employee > Save
- Go to Employees > Open the ``Dennis Cactus`` employee >
  In Payroll tab, Income Stream Type: Other specified payments > Save
- Go back to payslip > click the compute sheet button

Traceback:
```py
KeyError: 'OSP'
```

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/13e64e0cb7f566cbbb46109fe1c218eb7a14eead/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L175-L178
The ``l10n_au_income_stream_type`` field on the payslip is a computed field that only depends on ``employee_id``.
As a result, changing the employee's Income Stream Type does not trigger a recomputation of the corresponding field on existing payslip.
So, when the ``payslip_ytd_totals`` field is computed, it uses the old value of ``l10n_au_income_stream_type`` field at [1], The resulting ``payslip_ytd_totals`` is then used to build the ``totals`` dictionary, and eventually, when the employee's current ``income_stream_type`` is used to access
``totals``, the mismatch key leads to the above traceback. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/13e64e0cb7f566cbbb46109fe1c218eb7a14eead/l10n_au_hr_payroll_account/models/hr_payslip.py#L75-L88

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/13e64e0cb7f566cbbb46109fe1c218eb7a14eead/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L269-L272

solution:

I added ``l10n_au_income_stream_type`` to ``add_to_compute()`` in ``compute_sheet()``.
This ensures that stale values of ``l10n_au_income_stream_type`` on
existing payslips are recomputed when the payslip sheet is computed.

sentry-7536819310

`_l10n_tr_nilvera_add_pdf_to_invoice` writes the response from `client.request('GET', '.../pdf')` directly into `ir.attachment.raw`. The Nilvera client sets `Accept: application/json` on the session and calls `response.json()` by default, so the returned value is a Python `str` holding the base64-encoded PDF body, not raw binary bytes.

The previous code wrote to the base64-aware `datas` field, which auto-decoded its input. An earlier fix switched to `raw` to work around a `binascii.Error` from Python 3.14's stricter base64 validation in the `datas` auto-decode path. That switch silently changed what ends up on disk (`datas` decodes its input, `raw` does not)

Storing that string in the binary `raw` field encodes it as UTF-8, so the file on disk ends up as the literal ASCII of the base64 text. The attachment is served as `application/pdf` but the browser receives base64 ASCII and cannot preview or download the PDF.

Call `b64decode(response)` before storing so the attachment contains the actual PDF bytes.

OPW-6302803

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270759

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Make a quotation with 2 products
- Product A with a unit price of 5503.26 with 15% taxes
- Product B with a unit price of 4058.04 with 15% taxes
- Order 7 of A and 2 of B, the total is 53634.73
- Go to the pos, make a downpayment for 100% of the price
- The total is 53634.74, which is one cent more than it should

**Why the fix:**

When importing this order, we calculate the price again, to do it we compute the price unit and the taxes for it, then we will multiply it by the qty and add it all to a downpayment line and add it to the order.
When we have multiple qty like this, we run the risk of having a rounding issue, as the price unit is rounded before being multiplied by the tax and the quantity of said line.

Unfortunately in this exemple, we either have a price without the taxes of 46638.89 which gives a total of 53634.72 once multiplied or we have 46638.90 which gives a total of 53634.74
So with a decimal of 2 there is no way we could have the right amount with only one line, which is why we split it in 2 lines to get more precision when importing the sale order.

The way it worked before this commit is to take the sum of all lines and to calculate the downpayment based on it. We now split it into multiple smaller lines to avoid rounding issues because that's how it's done on the Sale Order in the backend. By splitting the down payment into multiple lines we replicate the per-line rounding behavior, preventing 1-cent discrepancies.

This is fixed in 18.3 onwards by using the accounting helper functions, but they are not yet implemented in 18.0 and it will be too big of a change for 18.0 so this solution is suggested.

opw-6222937

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Create a product A, tracked by lots
- Create a kit product, include a component A
- Change the UoM to 0.5
- Go to the PoS, order this kit product
- Also order the component A, with a quantity of 2
- Pay for it, ask for an invoice
- Go to the created picking
- The Demand column is correctly computed and is 0.5
- The Quantity column is wrong and is 2

**Why the fix:**

When getting the data from https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e0d84c7fbb270d0d1f82572daefa96c2978d3785/addons/point_of_sale/models/stock_picking.py#L283 
we always get the component's line, as the move's product is the component, even if it used to be the kit product's move. This is because when exploding a kit's moves, it gets the kit's component as a product instead of keeping the kit product.

This was introducing a weird behavior because we took the quantity from the component line, and not from the kit line, meaning the kit would always have the same quantity as the component.

We now check if the move is actually a kit product's move, and if it is we adapt the qty to correct one by fetching the correct line's qty, and adapting it with the correct UoM.

Changing the line in itself would not work, as the kit itself is not tracked by lots, so we would not enter https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e0d84c7fbb270d0d1f82572daefa96c2978d3785/addons/point_of_sale/models/stock_picking.py#L284 
and the move line would not be correctly created.

opw-6153000

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262551

Define the correct hours in the leaves if the calendar has defined dates (`date_from` and `date_to`)

Use case example:
- Create a calendar and define on Friday (Morning: from 08:00 to 13.00, Afternoon: from 19:00 to 21:00) with date_to=2025-01-01.
- Define another specific Friday (Morning: from 09:00 to 14.00, Afternoon: from 17:00 to 20:00) in the same calendar with date_from=2025-01-01.
- Create an employee and define the calendar created for him/her.
- Create a leaves for the employee and select a Friday (2025-05-02).
- The start hour of the leave must be 2025-05-02 09:00:00
- The end hour of the leave must be 2025-05-02 20:00:00

![ejemplo-1](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e7f6bcf9-73f2-4412-840c-cbe42e5e9200)
![ejemplo-2](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/211c07c8-c068-4137-b032-e26f9567e8b3)

Please @pedrobaeza can you review it?

@Tecnativa TT56218


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#254249
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#208378

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Accounting and l10n_ar_withholding
- Switch to an Argentinian company (e.g. (AR) Responsable Inscripto)

- Create a 0% Payment Withholding tax:
  * Tax Type: Customer Payment Withholding
  * Amount: 0.00 %
  * Add an account for the tax distribution lines

- Create an invoice with a tax
- Confirm the invoice
- Pay the invoice:
  * Withholdings:
       - Add a line with the created 0% Payment Withholding tax
       - Add a line with another Payment Withholding tax
- Create Payment
- Go to the payment

**Issue 1:**
When clicking on the first withholding line, a JS error is raised due to a missing index (i.e. currency_id).

**Cause 1:**
One of the fields has an aggregate sum function applied on it (i.e. amount_currency).
As it is a monetary field, the corresponding currency field is required in the view.

**Issue 2:**
When resetting the payment to draft, the withholding line with the 0% tax is deleted.
As the withholding table is not editable, it is not possible to add the line again.

**Cause 2:**
When the payment is reset to draft, the state of the associated journal entry is also set to draft and a "_sync_dynamic_lines" is triggered, which remove tax lines having a zero amount during the process.

**Solution 2:**
Keep all the lines with a Customer Payment Withholding tax as it is not possible to add a withholding line in the payment afterwards.

opw-6298058




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