In this commit:
------------------
- Maintain separate Fiskaly transaction flows for retail (short tx) and restaurant (long tx)
  orders as discussed with the Fiskaly team.
- `Initialize order transactions` with an empty payload when the `first product` is added.
- Start `receipt transactions` with an empty payload when the `first payment line` is added.
- For retail flows, no intermediate order updates are sent to Fiskaly before finalization.
- For restaurant flows, create additional transaction updates during kitchen synchronization.
  Ensure already synchronized products are not resent, and only newly added or updated
  quantities are included in the payload.
- `Finalize order and receipt transactions` with complete order lines and payment details
  when we validate the order.

task: 6208963

Reference:
<img width="1863" height="1285" alt="de_tss_flow" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9140788e-7948-4a08-9f11-27197b22ca8b" />

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120529
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117526

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install sale_crm and sale_renting_crm
2. Create an opportunity
3. On this opportunity, create two quotations from the `New quotation` button
4. From the opportunity's form view, click on the `Quotation` smart button

Issue:
- The quotations are not visible in the list view

Why?
- In module `sale_renting_crm`, we override the domain to exclude rental quotations.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fda037c62a6661665611fb061718c01aec39ac1b/sale_renting_crm/models/crm_lead.py#L33-L36 But from the saas-19.3 `is_rental_order` field is no longer stored in the DB, It is computed now and filtered through  `_search_is_rental_order`. 
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fda037c62a6661665611fb061718c01aec39ac1b/sale_renting/models/sale_order.py#L223-L227 The search method did not properly handle the Boolean search shape used by the ORM, so the quotations were incorrectly filtered out. In our case, we gave the domain `("is_rental_order", "=", False)` but the operator is translated to `not in` and value to `Orderedset([True])` by the domain optimiser

Solution:
- Update `_search_is_rental_order()` to handle the ORM-normalized boolean search correctly for rental and non-rental quotations.

opw-6304696

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120869

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting
2. Go to Journal entries and create a new one
3. Click Toggle Studio button and go to the view to add the tax_base_amount field to the list of existing fields
4. Add 2 lines (example):
	1. account Product Sales with 1000 dollars credit and 15% tax under Tax column
	2. account Bank with 1000 dollars debit
5. Go to Dashboard > Bank > Click the 3 dots of one random bank matching line and click on Manage Models
6. Go to bank fees and add the 15% tax
7. Go back to bank reconciliation and create a new one of 2000 dollars with label bank fees (it will associate the tax automatically)
8. Go back to Journal Entries, group by Journal and search for the transaction of 2000 sollars for account Bank
9. Problem: see that the Base Amount for the 15% bank fees lines (251000 Tax Received account) is 0. Clicking on Reset to draft button the base amount column is automatically updated but this should happen automatically

### Cause of the issue:
This occurs because the _lines_prepare_tax_line method in account.bank.statement.line fails to map this field in its return dictionary.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
Currently, when applying a reconciliation model with taxes the generated tax lines incorrectly record a tax_base_amount of $0.00. Instead, it should be displayed and calculated.

opw-6220948

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123603
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122139

Currently when a shopfloor operator modifies the operator, operator images are not visible and only place holder images are visible.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Manufacturing with demo data
- Login as Marc Demo
- Open shopfloor

## Observed Behavior:
Operator is unable to see their own profile picture and when you press the Edit Operator the operator is not able to see their as well as other operators images as well.

## Root cause:
This issue occurs because by default an operator's user does not have access right for `Employees` in Human Resources section as they are not an HR officer nor an administrator.

So when the user tries to access the image url that is meant for users with those access rights (HR officer / Administrator) at [1] and at [2].

The system returns a placeholder image instead of the employee image since the operator does not have access to hr employee model but does have access to hr employee public as per this [commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c9ca3761464413327d2beb697553a3ccd7eef4d1)

[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/5fe2fb44f4c8a938390343f7cdc90674cbf09391/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/dialog/mrp_employee_dialog.js#L16 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/5fe2fb44f4c8a938390343f7cdc90674cbf09391/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/employees_panel.xml#L9-L10 

## Solution:
Allowing operators to see images can be done by modifying the links to use the public model instead of the private model.

This will allow operators see other operators based on images and should improve user experience.

| Before |
|--------|
| <img width="1865" height="844" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c28f4209-0a60-486a-bfec-2a4db39cd946" /> |
| <img width="995" height="899" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7541edd9-6cc9-42d1-b5c5-39e0740d9a93" /> | 

| After |
|--------|
| <img width="1881" height="903" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/df3f8357-5cc2-4688-83dd-9a009fd56957" /> |
| <img width="1221" height="862" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c9d72b07-e1ad-43e4-85f5-00d8f1db9095" /> | 



opw-6321989

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123361
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121751

# How to reproduce
- Go to Inventory > Settings > Operation Types
- Pick any Operation and disable "Allow extra product"
- Create a picking for that operation type with atleast one product and click on "Mark as Todo"
- Go to the Barcode app and find the created picking
- Scan all the reserved products
- Exit the picking and re-enter

# The problem
The "Add Product" button is displayed and you can scan unreserved products even tough you sould not be allowed to

# Cause of the issue
The problem stems from the fact that even with "Allow extra product" disabled, we still allow to add unreserved products for immediate transfers (created directly in the barcode app). The issue is that we don't really have a way to distinguish immediate transfers from plannified ones made in the Inventory app. So we try to guess using the `_useReservation` attribute (If it is false, we allow additional products).

`_useReservation` is computed as follows : if any move lines from the inital state is not yet picked, set it to true :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ca4b369e4fc9f4655574cf1ca71c81faaadc3e88/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L43

So in our case, once all the reserved products are scanned, all the initial move lines are picked and our guessing fails.

# Proposed Solution
Since immediate transfers are never validated and stays in draft mode, guess using the state of the current picking in addition to `useReservation`

opw-6231238

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118378

The sidebar always loads the user's favorite articles along with the visible ones, so a favorited article is shown as a root of the favorite tree. When that favorite is also a child of a folded article, it gets added to its parent's child_ids in the main tree, even though the parent's other children were not fetched. A folded article only gets its favorited children back from get_sidebar_articles, not its whole child set.

When the parent is then unfolded, unfold() only read the children from the database when child_ids was empty. The favorited child already filled child_ids, so the call was skipped and the remaining children stayed hidden until the next reload.

unfold() now uses a new children_loaded flag instead of the length of child_ids to decide whether to fetch the children. The flag is set once an article's whole child set is loaded: in loadChildren(), and in loadArticles() for the articles that were unfolded, since those come back with all their children. loadChildren() also rebuilds child_ids from the search result so a favorite already loaded is not added twice. The fix lives in the sidebar component because the partial child_ids only exists on the frontend, get_sidebar_articles already returns the right records.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open the Knowledge app
2. Create an article with two child articles
3. Add one of the two children to your favorites with the star icon
4. Open another article that is not under that parent
5. Fold the parent article in the sidebar, then refresh the page
6. Expand the parent article

=> only the favorited child is shown under the parent, the other child is missing

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6186466)
opw-6186466

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118804

**Commit 1:  [FIX] account_reports: warning for CTA visibility**
Steps to reproduce:
- Open the balance sheet

-> The warning for CTA is displayed even when a single company is selected.
It should only be the case if multiple companies having different currencies
are involved in the computation of the report.

**Commit 2: [FIX] account_reports: hide groupby field on form view for composite report**
this field is useless for composite reports.

**Commit 3: [FIX] account_reports: differentiate UX for auditable external values.**
When creating a budget in the P&L, the external value cells should not be
auditable. The data was properly set but not the templates.

**Commit 4: [FIX] account_reports: avoid traceback on double-click on warning**
Steps to reproduce:
- Open an accounting report with any warning banner ("draft entries" for example)
- Quickly double-click the delete cross button

-> traceback stating that it cannot read properties of null (reading 'remove').

**Commit 5: [FIX] account_reports: working file card style adjustments**
<img width="401" height="317" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/76f636f0-09d8-44e5-8c7c-37561dc00b10" />


task-6361495

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install `l10n_ke_edi_oscu_pos`, set company to Kenya.
2. Sell and validate an order.
3. Refund it from the POS and validate the refund order.

Issue:
- A traceback is raised when validating the refund: `ValueError: Expected singleton: pos.order(<refund>, <original>)` raised in `get_l10n_ke_edi_oscu_pos_data`.

Cause:
- When syncing a refund, `sync_from_ui` returns both the new refund order and the original refunded order. `waitForPushOrder` forces post-processing for every Kenyan order in that list, so `beforePostPushOrderResolve` receives both ids in `order_server_ids` and forwards them as-is to `action_post_order` and `get_l10n_ke_edi_oscu_pos_data`, both of which expect a single record. `action_post_order` fails the same way, but its error was silently swallowed by the surrounding try/catch, letting the traceback surface only on the second call.
- The same multi-id list is also produced whenever several orders created offline get synced together once back online.

Solution:
- `get_l10n_ke_edi_oscu_pos_data` is only needed for the receipt of the order being validated, so call it with `order.id` instead of the full `order_server_ids` list.
- Replace the `action_post_order` call with `action_post_selected_orders`, which posts each order individually and skips ones already sent to eTIMS, correctly handling both the refund case (original order is already `sent`) and the offline multi-order sync case.

opw-6364221

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123043

# How to reproduce
You need to simulate the fact that you are creating an appraisal late so either : 
A) Directly edit the `next_appraisal_date` in SQL
B) Go to Employee App > any Employee > Settings, set Next Appraisal Date to tomorrow and wait for 2 days

Then :
- Click on Request Appraisal
- Save

# The problem
An error is shown saying "You cannot set 'Next Appraisal Date' in the past.". You can workaround this by changing the Next Appraisal Date to a date in the future, but the problem is not every user has the right to do this.

# Cause
`next_appraisal_date` is also defined in hr.appraisal as a relate field of hr.employee : https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0226ad15abc8db70f8e379fddec3d83d15749c85/hr_appraisal/models/hr_appraisal.py#L56-L57

When creating an hr.appraisal, `next_appraisal_date` is present in `vals_list` because it is defined in the view since : https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/58fba3098f33db82dfbccca2db229550402ed3ab https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0226ad15abc8db70f8e379fddec3d83d15749c85/hr_appraisal/views/hr_appraisal_views.xml#L92

This triggers a write on `next_appraisal_date` of hr.employee which triggers a constraint : https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0226ad15abc8db70f8e379fddec3d83d15749c85/hr_appraisal/models/hr_employee.py#L81-L85

opw-6147865

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122440
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#114876

Before this commit, _compute_l10n_be_computed_seniority looped over cp200_versions but still read self.employee_id and self.l10n_be_scale_seniority, so when Odoo batched multiple CP200 versions together, the whole recordset was passed to _get_first_version_date(), crashing with a singleton error.

After this commit, the loop correctly uses version.employee_id and version.l10n_be_scale_seniority instead.

Traceback (important part):

```py
    File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/l10n_be_hr_payroll/models/hr_version.py", line 1508, 
  in _compute_l10n_be_computed_seniority                                                 
      company_seniority = relativedelta(fields.Date.today(),                             
  self.employee_id._get_first_version_date()).years                                      
                                                                                         
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                                             
    File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/addons/hr/models/hr_employee.py", line 621, in             
  _get_first_version_date                                                                
      versions = self._get_last_consecutive_versions(date_limit)                         
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                         
    File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/addons/hr/models/hr_employee.py", line 595, in             
  _get_last_consecutive_versions                                                         
      self.ensure_one()                                                                  
    File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5406, in ensure_one              
      raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)                                  
  ValueError: Expected singleton: hr.employee(30, 1)           
  ```

task-6377630

Steps to reproduce:
------------------------------------
1. Install the Knowledge module.
2. Open any article.
3. Click the header icon. If no icon is present, add one from the Actions menu.
4. Click the header icon again.
5. Click Remove icon from the emoji picker.

Observation:
------------------------------------
A traceback is raised when removing the header icon. 
```
TypeError: Cannot set properties of undefined (setting 'scrollTop')
```

Issue:
------------------------------------
The emoji picker component updates its scroll position through a grid reference.

After this PR - https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/269588, the emoji picker was migrated to Owl 3, which changed the way component references are handled. The header icon removal flow still uses the previous ref access pattern, causing the grid reference to be `undefined` when attempting to update `scrollTop`, resulting in a traceback.

Solution:
------------------------------------
Update the syntax for accessing the ref signal.

## [FIX] sale_renting_planning: check global leaves working schedule

Before this commit: any `resource.calendar.leaves` with no `resource_id` created would prevent all resources from being allocated during the leave date.

After this commit: any `resource.calendar.leaves` with `no resource_id` would be applied only to resources with the same `calendar_id` as the leave.

if the leave has no `calendar_id` then the leave applies to all `resource.calendars`

if a resource has no `calendar_id` then leaves with no `calendar_id` apply to it as well

## [IMP] {website_}sale_renting_planning: move tests from industry and fix existing ones

This commit moves the tests from [odoo/industry#1980](vscode-file://vscode-app/snap/code/237/usr/share/code/resources/app/out/vs/code/electron-browser/workbench/workbench.html) to their respective standard modules.

It also fixes the logic behind some tests as they weren't testing a `planning.role` with `sync_shift_rental` enabled.

task-6179505

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120983
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#116430

### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
International production payments processed via Redsys are failing with error code 9754 (SIS0754). This rejection occurs because the EMV3DS (3D Secure 2.0) payload is sending the billAddrState field with an invalid ISO code format for non-Spanish customers or customers without a state configured.

### Current behavior before PR:
The _redsys_prepare_merchant_parameters method hardcodes the billAddrState key into the DS_MERCHANT_EMV3DS dictionary payload. If self.partner_state_id.code is missing or empty, Odoo sends an empty/falsy value. Because Redsys enforces strict EMV3DS format validation, it rejects the entire transaction for having an invalid state format rather than simply ignoring the empty value.

### Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The DS_MERCHANT_EMV3DS dictionary is now constructed dynamically. The billAddrState key is only appended to the payload if a valid state code actually exists for the partner. RedSys allows this field to be optional, so omitting the key entirely when unavailable causes Redsys to skip the validation for that specific field, allowing certain international payments to process successfully.

opw-6237764

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274912
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270899

Version:
---------
- saas-18.4+

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------
1. Install `stock` and `purchase` module
2. Create a storable and tracking product with a vendor.
3. Create a reordering rule: Route = Buy, Min Qty = 10, Max Qty = 20 
and Trigger `manual`
4. Create a receipt for 10 units from the vendor and confirm it.(Mark as todo).
5. Observe the Order button is hidden in reorder rule(expected—incoming qty covers the minimum)
6. Delete the receipt move line.
7. Open reordering rule and check order button

Issue:
------
After deleting a confirmed incoming move, the Order button on the reordering rule
does not reappear, even though there is no longer any incoming quantity to cover
the minimum threshold.

Cause:
-------
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/adabd8cc47b1c5992f0f92631da73977be8beaca/addons/stock/views/stock_orderpoint_views.xml#L55-L56

The Order button visibility is driven by `qty_to_order > 0` on the orderpoint.
`qty_to_order` itself resolves to `qty_to_order_computed` (a stored field) when no
manual override is set:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/adabd8cc47b1c5992f0f92631da73977be8beaca/addons/stock/models/stock_orderpoint.py#L317-L319

 ``` 
 qty_to_order─depends─>qty_to_order_computed  (stored)
                                      │
                                      └─ reads qty_forecast  (non-stored, computed)
                                              │
                                              └─ depends on product_id.stock_move_ids.
 ```

`_compute_qty_to_order_computed` checks whether `qty_forecast < product_min_qty`.
If so, it calculates how much to order to reach `product_max_qty`. When a confirmed
incoming move exists, its quantity is included in `qty_forecast`,

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/adabd8cc47b1c5992f0f92631da73977be8beaca/addons/stock/models/stock_orderpoint.py#L347
This return False.
So, `qty_to_order_computed = 0` → button hidden.

To avoid recomputing `qty_to_order_computed` for all orderpoints on every stock
move change severe performance issue — see [Commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/6f2d1b26b34129cfbd62d2fe44f306bfe89794b5
), 
`qty_forecast` is intentionally excluded from
 `@api.depends` on `qty_to_order_computed`. Instead,
`_update_orderpoints()` is called selectively from `create()` and `write()` to
schedule a targeted recompute via `env.add_to_compute()`.

However, `unlink()` never called `_update_orderpoints()`, so deleting a move left
`qty_to_order_computed` stale at 0 — the Order button stayed hidden permanently.

Solution:
---------
- `_update_orderpoints()` now returns the found orderpoints recordset.
- `unlink()` calls `_update_orderpoints()` before deletion to capture the affected
  orderpoints (product_id / location data still accessible), then calls
  `_compute_qty_to_order_computed()` immediately after `super().unlink()`.

opw-6174454


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275119
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264039

**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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274604
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271555

Problem:
When filtering lost leads and grouping them, the lost leads are not counted in the groups' totals.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Go to CRM
2. Go to Reporting > Leads
3. Select List View
4. Before applying any grouping, check the total number of leads and
make sure there are some closed leads among the leads and that the
applied filter includes the inactive/lost leads
5. Apply any grouping
6. Check how the sum of the groups totals doesn't equal the leads total

Cause:
When reading a group, the domain from the applied filter gets optimized, meaning that the applied rules get simplified logically.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4d079cc5a9c47672cf1a6747bb073e8e74f7350/addons/web/models/models.py#L421
When looking for all leads, we filter by both active and inactive leads, but the optimize method removes both of them since active=TRUE OR active=FALSE = TRUE always. When removed, no filtering on the active field is in the domain now, which leads to the search method returning only active leads (default behaviour of search method when the active field is not set in the domain).

opw-6302388

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272390

Steps to reproduce
-------------------

- Install sale_project, accountant and project_timesheet_forecast_sale modules;
- Activate analytic accounting in the settings;
- Add an outstanding account to the bank journal’s manual outgoing payment method;
- Create a new billable project;
- Open the top menu, add vendor bills and open it;
- Create a new bill from there, it should use the project’s analytic distribution;
- Confirm it and create a payment;
- Open the payment’s journal entry, it is using the analytic distribution too;

Why is it happening
--------------------

When opening a vendor bill from the project, the project_id is added to the account.move's context to use the correct analytic distribution when we create a  bill.

If we create a payment after accessing the bill from this route, the context is transfered to account.payment.register, and then to the payment's entry lines in the `_create_payments` method.

Due to the `_compute_analytic_distribution` method, the project's distribution is used on the payment's entry.

We propose to filter out payment lines in this compute method.

opw-6329475


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275076

# How to reproduce
- Create a new product
- Add a reordering rule to that product with :
	- Trigger : Auto
	- Min : > Forecast
- Activate dev mode
- Go to Seetings > Technical > Automation > Scheduled Actions
- Find the "Procurement: run Scheduler" action & run it manually

# The issue
We get a traceback :
psycopg2.errors.SerializationFailure: could not serialize access due to concurrent update

# Cause
In Odoo, we use an isolation level of "REPEATABLE READ" for transactions :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7c35e183d6cc33a6e5d20e5e97ffef79e03b49d4/odoo/sql_db.py#L373

Even with that isolation level psql can throw a `SerializationFailure` if a transaction
attempts to update a row that was modified by another transaction after the isolation
snapshot was taken.

### Example that will raise an error :

Session 1
```SQL
BEGIN ISOLATION LEVEL REPEATABLE READ;
UPDATE accounts SET balance = balance - 100 WHERE id = 1;
```

Session 2
```SQL
BEGIN ISOLATION LEVEL REPEATABLE READ;
UPDATE accounts SET balance = balance - 50 WHERE id = 1;
COMMIT;
```

Back to Session 1
```SQL
COMMIT;
```

When running our action, we do this :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/dff0835346f30fd1ef77260d94bcceeeab4d9051/addons/stock/models/stock_rule.py#L697-L703

Which correspond exactly to the first example :
We first update some records with their compute

Then `orderpoints.sudo()._procure_orderpoint_confirm(...)` creates a new
transaction, update some rows & commits :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/dff0835346f30fd1ef77260d94bcceeeab4d9051/addons/stock/models/stock_orderpoint.py#L716-L719
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/dff0835346f30fd1ef77260d94bcceeeab4d9051/addons/stock/models/stock_orderpoint.py#L781-L783

Finally, we commit the original transaction with `_commit_progress(1)`

# Proposed solution
Inverse the order of  `_commit_progress(1)` and
`orderpoints.sudo()._procure_orderpoint_confirm(...)` so we commit
the first transaction before starting the second one.

opw-6261675
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268616

Steps
-------
- Configure a fiscalized PoS (Germany, Sweden, or Belgium).
- Open a restaurant PoS session.
- Add a product with a quantity of `4`.
- Decrease the quantity to `2` using the Decrease Quantity popup.

Issue
------
- A traceback is raised when confirming the decrease quantity popup.
- Additionally, the original order line is updated directly instead of
  creating a separate negative line.

Cause
-----
- The serialized order line contains the `id` of the original line, causing the
create operation to overwrite the existing line instead of creating a new one.

Fix
---
- Remove the ID from the serialized values before creating the new order line.

Additional fix
----------------
- When we have a new line with negative quantity, it will never create a new
line on ordering as there was a condition like line's qty - prep quantity is the
quantity diff which is if +ve create new line else update line so in this case
it's like -2 - 0 = -2 which will go to removedline and it's not so how will it update
neither create a new line.

task- 6313732

When opening a table that has no order, `setTable` recycles an existing empty floating order instead of creating a new one (to avoid leaving dangling blank orders behind). The filter only checked for the absence of a table, lines and finalized state, so it could grab any empty floating order, including one deliberately created for takeout or delivery.

Steps to reproduce:
- Open a restaurant POS with presets enabled (e.g. Dine in / Takeaway).
- Cashier A creates a new floating order for a phone customer: selects the Takeaway preset with a future time slot, but has not added any product yet.
- Meanwhile, cashier B opens an empty table from the floor screen.
- => The takeout order is assigned to the table and becomes a dine-in order, losing its takeout context.

Only recycle blank direct sale orders: skip orders that have a floating order name, a scheduled preset time or a preset different from the config default, as those were created on purpose. Tapping a table while on a blank dine-in scratch order still converts it as before.

opw-6041750

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262573

#### Issue:
When a credit note is renamed so that it sorts before the related invoices,
the lot assigned on invoice previews can become incorrect. Already posted
invoices can appear to consume the first lot again.

Example:
A sale order is delivered in 2 batches: 10 units from SN01, then 10 units
from SN02. Invoice 1 correctly shows SN01 and Invoice 2 correctly shows
SN02. If Invoice 1 is refunded, re-invoiced, and the credit note is then
renamed so it sorts before the invoices, Invoice 2 can incorrectly switch
back to SN01.

#### Steps to reproduce:
- Enable "Display Lots & Serial Numbers on Invoices".
- Create a sale order for 20 units of a tracked product.
- Deliver 10 units from the first lot/serial number and 10 units from a second one in a backorder.
- Create and post 2 invoices, one for each delivery.
- Create and post a credit note for the first invoice.
- Create and post a new invoice for 10 units.
- Reset the credit note to draft, rename it so that it sorts before the invoices, then repost it.
- Check the lot previews on the invoices.

#### Root Cause:
_get_invoiced_lot_values() orders invoice lines with move_name, which is
mutable, then computes the previously invoiced quantities from that order.
When a refund is renamed so it sorts before the invoices, the set of
"previous" invoice lines changes. On top of that, reversed invoices are
filtered out too broadly, even when their reversing move should not yet
impact the current invoice chronology.

#### Fix:
Order invoice lines with immutable move ids instead of move_name, and only
ignore reversed invoices once their reversing move is also before the
current invoice in the effective chronology. This keeps posted invoices
stable while preserving the re-invoice behavior.

opw-6110232
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264776

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#273534
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268842

When an orderpoint fails during a portal user's transaction (e.g., eCommerce checkout), the system catches the `Procurement Exception` and logs a warning activity on the product template. The exception handler uses `.sudo().activity_schedule()`, which bypasses the write access restriction but leaves `env.uid` as the portal user.

Therefore, the restricted portal user permanently becomes the `create_uid` (Author) of the activity.

System exception activities should always be authored by the system (OdooBot), never by a portal or public user. This context leak corrupts the activity metadata by injecting an external user ID into internal backend logs. Chain `.with_user(SUPERUSER_ID)` to the `.sudo()` call in `stock_orderpoint.py` when scheduling the exception activity.

This ensures the environment context is stable and the activity is authored by OdooBot, which transcends multi-company record rules.

Steps to Reproduce on Runbot/Fresh Database on version 17.0:
1. Enable Multi-Company with Company A and Company B. Set Company B as the active company for the website.
2. Restrict the main Admin (Runbot) user strictly to Company A.
3. Create a Shared Product (Company field left blank).
4. Set a Reordering Rule (Orderpoint) for the product that is guaranteed to fail routing.
5. Navigate to the frontend website and sign up as a new user (this creates a Portal User in Company B).
6. As the newly signed-up Portal User, complete an eCommerce checkout for the shared product.
7. The checkout succeeds, but the backend triggers the orderpoint failure and logs the exception activity on the product template.
8. Check the chatter for this product: the `create_uid` is incorrectly set to the Portal User instead of OdooBot (1).
9. (In 19.0 Upgrade) Log in as the Admin user (set strictly to view Company A), navigate to the product, and the AccessError for reading will appear due to this leaked id.

[opw-6253978](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/my-support-tasks/6253978?debug=assets)


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275140
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269395

Problem:
When creating a product from an invoice form view, the list price set on the product is not saved on the product template. After creating the product, when checking the product from the products list, the set list price is not shown.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Go to Accounting > Customers > Invoices
2. Create a new invoice
3. Create and edit a new product from the invoice line and set a new list price for the new product
4. Go to Sales > Products and open the created product
5. Check the list price of the product
6. Notice how the set list price is not shown on the product form view

Cause:
Product variants show lst_price while product templates show list_price on their form views. When creating a product from the invoice line, the shown form is for the product variant. When setting the list price on
the product variant form (lst_price in that case), the inverse method of llst_price, which sets the list_price in return, is called during the creation of the variant, after the template has been created and saved. As a result, editing the list price does not trigger a write on the already saved product template, causing the list_price of the variant to
be different than the list_price of the template.

opw-6272825

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270614

Login uniqueness is enforced by a `UNIQUE (login)` constraint that Postgres compares byte for byte, so signing up with foo@example.com and then Foo@example.com produces two separate accounts pointing at the same real mailbox.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/66a6c16551041543b5addfe846f15e769b4e9afe/odoo/addons/base/models/res_users.py#L274

Even if the DB constraint did catch an exact-case duplicate and `_signup_create_user` re-raised it as a `SignupError`, the controller's friendly "already registered" branch only triggers when the duplicate lookup finds a row, and that lookup goes through `_get_login_domain` with an exact `=` operator. Case variants would fall into the generic "Could not create a new account" branch instead.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/66a6c16551041543b5addfe846f15e769b4e9afe/addons/auth_signup/controllers/main.py#L68-L75
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/66a6c16551041543b5addfe846f15e769b4e9afe/odoo/addons/base/models/res_users.py#L749-L750

`_signup_create_user` now refuses creation when a user with the same email already exists, applying to both b2c free signup and token-based invitations. It raises `UserError` directly so the controller's `except UserError` surfaces the message without a redundant lookup. The check uses `_get_email_domain`, whose base implementation is switched from `=` to `=ilike` over a value escaped via `tools.escape_psql` so `%` and `_` are matched literally rather than as wildcards. Its only existing caller is `reset_password`, which already wants case-insensitive matching.

Steps to reproduce:
1. In Settings, set Customer Account to "Free sign up" and save.
2. Log out, then on the login page click "Don't have an account?".
3. Register with foo@example.com.
4. Log out again and click "Don't have an account?".
5. Register with Foo@example.com.

=> Two distinct user accounts are created for the same mailbox.

opw-6199441

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273071
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#263864

Before this commit, when using discuss in mobile, actions in bottom sheet were too small and hard to click.

Steps to reproduce:
- open a conversation in discuss with a message
- click on "..." or long-press the message

This comes from changes in spreadsheet_dashboard were some CSS rules that were meant to impact only bottom sheet of spreadsheet_dashboard were actually impacting all the bottom sheets [1], including discuss actions.

This commit fixes the issue by putting a specific class on the bottom sheet menu in spreadsheet_dashboard, so that the CSS rule can be made specific to spreadsheet_dashboard and not affect other bottom sheets like the ones used in Discuss app.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/239190

Before
<img width="657" height="524" alt="Screenshot 2026-07-10 at 14 18 38" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6e4cd083-3d4c-4c38-af89-93819e6eb1a8" />

After
<img width="656" height="527" alt="Screenshot 2026-07-10 at 14 18 25" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/48e66648-7f5e-4e42-8a64-b85499aceb97" />

Use case
--------

A recurring sale order, is automatically invoiced. The transaction is postprocessed and crash with this traceback

```
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/sale_subscription/models/sale_order.py", line 1881, in _handle_automatic_invoices
invoice._post()
File "/home/odoo/src/custom/private/openerp_enterprise/models/subscription_assignation.py", line 439, in _post
posted_moves = super()._post(soft=soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/custom/private/openerp_enterprise/models/account.py", line 193, in _post
posted = super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/hr_payroll_expense/models/account_move.py", line 21, in _post
res = super()._post(soft=soft) # Posting will automatically reconcile same-account-same-matching lines
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/l10n_in_reports/models/account_move.py", line 135, in _post
to_post = super()._post(soft=soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/account_loans/models/account_move.py", line 20, in _post
posted = super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/sale_subscription/models/account_move.py", line 21, in _post
posted_moves = super()._post(soft=soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/account_invoice_extract/models/account_invoice.py", line 235, in _post
posted = super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/account_asset/models/account_move.py", line 130, in _post
posted = super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/l10n_it_edi/models/account_move.py", line 360, in _post
return super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/l10n_in_edi/models/account_move.py", line 156, in _post
res = super()._post(soft=soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account_peppol_response/models/account_move.py", line 42, in _post
res = super()._post(soft)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/sale/models/account_move.py", line 149, in _post
invoice.js_assign_outstanding_line(line.id)
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/account_accountant/models/account_move.py", line 589, in js_assign_outstanding_line
super().js_assign_outstanding_line(line_id)
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account/models/account_move.py", line 6430, in js_assign_outstanding_line
return lines.reconcile()
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py", line 3324, in reconcile
return self._reconcile_plan([self])
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py", line 2978, in _reconcile_plan
plan_list, all_amls = self._optimize_reconciliation_plan(reconciliation_plan)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py", line 2940, in _optimize_reconciliation_plan
amls._check_amls_exigibility_for_reconciliation(shadowed_aml_values=shadowed_aml_values)
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py", line 2832, in _check_amls_exigibility_for_reconciliation
raise UserError(_("You can not reconcile cancelled entries."))

You can not reconcile cancelled entries.
```

Because an old transaction: state = 'reconciled' but is_reconciled is false get attached to the new invoice. The the tx.payment_id.move_id was cancelled by the accounting team, and the invoice was reconcilled directly with the bank statement.

So we end up with a cancelled move that block any further invoice for this subscription.

Solution
--------

According to accounting team, the move_id of the payment is always posted except if there is some manual intervention. We make sure we link only transaction with payment with posted moved

opw-6368231

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#275445
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274764

`ImDispatch.subscribe()` lazily starts the dispatcher thread with:

```py
    if not self.is_alive():
        self.start()
```
However, this check isn't atomic: two subscribers can reach it at the same instant (a bunch of clients reconnecting after a downtime/restart/etc..) and two of them can have the condition "is not alive" and both of them will call `start()`.

Technically, this is not a big deal, since `Thread.start()` will only successfully starts once and raise an Error `Threads can only be start3e once` which is already catch and ignored with `contextlib.suppress(RuntimeError)`.

But this is a problem with some APM (like sentry) where they override `threading.Thread.start` to do something different than stdlib, and so something we can not know nor control.

The RuntimeError guard only tells us who's allowed to actually spawn the thread. It says nothing about code attached to `start()`/`run()` that runs on every attempt, win or lose, and that's exactly the part we don't control.

For example, sentry-sdk (before 2.34) patches `Thread.start` to wrap `self.run` on *every* call, not only the one that actually starts the thread:
```py
    def sentry_start(self, *a, **kw):
        self.run = wrap(self.run)      # <- side effect, runs unconditionally
        return real_start(self, *a, **kw)
```
Under the race described above, every losing call still wraps `self.run` before failing. Each wrapper forwards its own extra argument to the one it wraps, without dropping what it already received, so each layer adds one more positional argument. By the time the thread actually starts, `ImDispatch.run()` ends up called with N positional arguments instead of one:
```
    TypeError: ImDispatch.run() takes 1 positional argument but N were given
```
N varies from one report to the next simply because it depends on how many subscribers happened to race on that particular restart.

Rather than relying on the RuntimeError to paper over a race we still allow to happen, we remove the race itself: wrapping the check and the `start()` call in a lock guarantees at most one caller ever gets past the "not alive" check. `start()` is called exactly once, so there's nothing left for third-party instrumentation to react to more than once.

Note:
Reproduced locally by firing many concurrent `subscribe()` calls at a freshly created `ImDispatch` with sentry-sdk 1.39.2 installed: the TypeError appears reliably, with the reported argument count matching the number of racing calls. The same scenario no longer fails once the lock is in place, regardless of the sentry-sdk version installed.

sentry-3928947199

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275084

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
When grouping datetime fields by hour, `read_group` formats the group display label using `hh:00 dd MMM`.

In Babel/LDML formatting, `hh` represents a 12-hour clock. Since the format does not include an AM/PM marker, afternoon/evening hours are displayed ambiguously in grouped views.

Current behavior before PR:
A datetime value in the afternoon is grouped under a 12-hour label without AM/PM.

For example, records around `13:50` are displayed under:

    01:00 20 Mar

Similarly, a datetime value around `16:20` may be grouped under:

    04:00 26 Mar

This is ambiguous because the group header does not indicate whether the hour is AM or PM.

Example screenshot showing records around 13:xx grouped under `01:00`:
<img width="310" height="240" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8768f2e8-9aaa-436b-af9f-40055a6032e9" />


Desired behavior after PR is merged:
Hour-based datetime group labels should be unambiguous.

The hour grouping format now uses `HH:00 dd MMM`, so grouped datetime labels render using a 24-hour clock.

For example:

    13:00 20 Mar
    16:00 26 Mar

This fixes the datetime hour grouping label shown in grouped list views and other `read_group` consumers.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275219
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274724