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

## [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

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

### 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

# 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

# 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

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

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

Steps to reproduce:
- Create one user linked to two companies.
- Create one employee per company for that user.
- Select one company and approve a time off for the employee.
- Open Tasks > Gantt and create a task during the approved time-off period the warning is shown and the Gantt cell is grayed out.
- Select both companies and create a task during the same time-off period in Tasks > Gantt.

Issue:
When multiple companies are selected, the time-off warning is still displayed but the corresponding Gantt cells are no longer grayed out, leading to an inconsistency between the warning logic and the Gantt rendering.

Cause:
In multi-company setups, a user can be linked to multiple resources. The Gantt unavailability logic assumed a one-to-one relationship between user and resource causing unavailability intervals from some resources to be overwritten.

Solution:
Aggregate unavailability intervals from all resources linked to the same user, limited to the selected companies, and merge them with the company calendar unavailability to ensure consistent Gantt gray rendering.
Related PR: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/57028

task-5089385

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123659
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#105288

# 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

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

**Steps to reproduce:**

1. Install the **Attendance** app in saas-19.2 with demo data.
2. Log in as a user who has **Administrator** rights in the Attendance app but no access rights in the Employees app.
3. Go to **Attendance → Configuration → Overtime Rulesets**.
4. Open any overtime ruleset.

An `AccessError` is raised:

```
File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.2/odoo/orm/models.py", line 3373,
in check_access
    raise result[1]()
 odoo.exceptions.AccessError: You are not allowed to access
'Employee Record' (hr.version) records.

This operation is allowed for the following groups:
	- Employees/Administrator
	- Employees/Officer: Manage all employees

Contact your administrator to request access if necessary.
```
**Issue:**

A new feature introduced an employee count stat button on `hr.attendance.overtime.ruleset` in [v19.2](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/236555/changes).

Users who have administer right in Attendance app but do not have access to Employee records trigger an access error when opening the ruleset.

**Solution:**

The fix restricts the visibility of the [Stat button ](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7c6f31d730304bca3f6c996800e76d1e40ce4adf/addons/hr_attendance/views/hr_attendance_overtime_rule_views.xml#L114)to users with the required Employee groups, preventing the access error while keeping the feature available for authorized users.

opw- 6358550
upg- 4449776


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

# 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

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

#### 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

**Problem:**
When scheduling a message using an email template with custom attachments, those attachments will not have their `res_model` and `res_id` updated to relate to the scheduled message record. This can lead to access errors.

**Cause:**
When composing a message using an email template with attachments, those attachments are created with their `res_model` and `res_id` values corresponding to the mail composer record. However, when scheduling a message, only attachments with no `res_id` value (or a value of 0) are updated to correspond to the scheduled message record. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/77b180e8251fb8019e0034e1c2f485fd2c34ea4e/addons/mail/wizard/mail_compose_message.py#L1198-L1201
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/30ca89b9e0d3c43d019167ec2de816c263f4bb92/addons/mail/models/mail_scheduled_message.py#L86

**Purpose:**
Modify the `mail.scheduled.message` override of `create` to not require an attachment have no `res_id` value to be properly updated.

**Steps to Reproduce in Runbot:**
1. Add an attachment to an email template.
2. Open a mail composer using that email template, then schedule the message for later.
3. Attempt to view the scheduled message with a different user.

More specific example flow:
1. Add an attachment to the Sales: Send Quotation email template.
2. Create a Quotation and send it with the Send by Email button, selecting Send Later instead of Send.
3. Attempt to view the Quotation with a different user.

opw-6293587

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272261

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

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

Issue:
The Item Trace Number according to CPA-005 standard should be a nonzero sequence that serves as unique reference ID for payments. Currently, Odoo sets the Item Trace Number of all payments as a zero-filled sequence 

According to CPA-005 standards on the Item Trace Number:
"The data elements (b), (c) and (d) each must be greater than zero or the TRANSACTION WILL BE REJECTED" (page 36).
https://www.payments.ca/sites/default/files/standard005eng.pdf

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install the module l10n_ca_payment_cpa005
2. Go into "CA Company"
3. In the configuration for "CA Company", add something to the fields "Short Name used in Canadian EFT" and "Company ID" i.e. "CCC"
4. Set all the fields in the "Canadian EFT/CPA Configuration" section of the bank journal
5. Set the bank record on the bank journal. Set the field "Financial Institution ID Number" field of the "Account Number" record of the bank journal to any numerical sequence
6. Create a bank account on "Azure Interior" and make sure to check the field to trust the bank account that you created (otherwise there will be an error)
7. Create two payments with the vendor of "Azure Interior" using the payment method of "Canadian EFT"
8. Create a batch payment for both payments created
9. Validate the batch payment and the export file should show up in the chatter
10. Note that in the export file, the Item Trace Number for each payment is set to be all zeros, whereas it should be a nonzero identification sequence

Solution:
Set the Item Trace Number to be the payment's id

opw-6323432

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123633

***Issue:***
Since https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/8baaad621a1555680cd77ab514f626137b5b584d the div holding the selection box and the Actions menu carries t-key="targetRecords.length" in the documents list and kanban views, so every change of the selection count destroys and recreates everything inside it. Ticking a document checkbox updates both the selection and the focused record, and with these two updates the recreation goes wrong: the new ActionMenus component ends up destroyed while its button is still in the page. The dropdown click listeners are removed with the component, so clicking Actions does nothing until the selection changes again.

That t-key was added because the selection box shows a stale count after a file upload. The real problem is that SelectionBox caches this.root once in setup. The upload flow reloads the model, which replaces the root record list, and the box keeps counting the selection of the old one.

***Fix:***
Remove the t-key from documents_list_controller.xml and documents_kanban_controller.xml and make DocumentsSelectionBox read the current props.root instead of the value cached by the parent setup. The count follows the new record list after an upload without remounting anything, and the Actions menu is not recreated so its dropdown keeps working. The upload scenario stays covered by the existing multi_view.test.js test, a new test checks that the Actions menu opens with two selected documents.

***Steps to reproduce:***
1. Open the Documents app
2. Switch to the list view
3. Tick the checkboxes of two documents
4. Click the Actions button next to the "2 selected" box

=> the Actions dropdown does not open

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6365618)

opw-6365618

Issue
-----
When shipping internationally with Easypost, the currency on the commercial invoice does not always match the one of the sale order.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Install Easypost
- Create a new pricelist using a different currency from the company
- Create a SO
	- Some product with a weight & HS code
	- Customer must be in another country from company (for commercial invoice)
	- Use the new pricelist
	- Add easypost delivery
- Confirm SO
- Validate linked picking

> Commercial invoice uses company currency instead of SO's

Cause
-----
The currency being sent to Easypost is retrieved from the package in

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4c540f450d4de8b59b871662123f85ed54cca2a9/delivery_easypost/models/easypost_request.py#L146

The package object is actually created by calling the carrier's `_get_packages_from_picking` method

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4c540f450d4de8b59b871662123f85ed54cca2a9/delivery_easypost/models/easypost_request.py#L266-L270

Solution
-----
We could be fixing this in `stock_delivery` by creating the package with the correct currency when calling `_get_packages_from_picking`. The problem with this approach is that this might negatively affect other carrier services, as discussed in https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/268224.

Instead, we can apply a band-aid fix to take the currency from the picking's sale in the `delivery_easypost` module, which is the only one where the problem was reported.

-----
Ticket:
opw-6224883

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123083

**Issue**:
Even when creation of new Serial Numbers for components is disabled
on the Manufacturing Operation Type, it is still possible to create
them from the shopfloor application.

**Steps to reproduce**:
- Enable "Lots & Serial Numbers", on the global settings
- Create two products, one tracked by unique serial number
- Go to Inventory > Configuration > Warehouse Management > Operations Types
- Select Manufacturing and disable "Create New Lots/Serial Numbers for Components"
- Create and confirm a MO using the tracked product as component
- Go to shopfloor
- Click the "+" button next to the component, then "New"
-> No error is raised when creating a serial number

**Cause**:
The `_check_create` constraint relies on `active_mo_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/494cdcfdf4ec166e0a643ee70a53c12c810d02b4/addons/mrp/models/stock_lot.py#L11-L19
However, the shopfloor does not pass this, in context:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/54c6252a0e13b11fc297b6828883923c0f89881a/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_record_line/stock_move.js#L193-L199

As a result, the check is bypassed.

opw-6041241

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111408

### [FIX] knowledge: load comments on first load
There was an issue where comments are not displayed when opening an article
containing some.

How to reproduce:
- create a new article, write some text and add some comments.
- reload the page

Issue:
- comments are not displayed, but they are when switching back and forth to
  another article

Reason:
Owl2 -> Owl3 refactoring:
commit [1] replaced useRecordObserver by onWillUpdateProps, however the 2
are not equivalent, especially over the timing of the first call
(useRecordObserver callback is called during setup).

### [FIX] knowledge: batch vertical dimensions computation once
There was an issue where comments were not displayed at their correct position
(height/top) in "handler" mode.

How to reproduce:
- create an article with 3 comments over 5 lines, following a given pattern:
  - one comment on the first line
  - one comment on the second line
  - keep the third line empty
  - one comment across the 4th and 5th lines
- reload the page (issue 1)
- click successively on the 3 comments zones (issue 2)

Issue:
- issue 1: the comments on reload overlap each other while they should not
- issue 2: when clicking on the 3rd comment, the 1st and 2nd comments appear
  offset by an abnormal vertical distance (which should not exist)

Reason:
Owl2 -> Owl3 refactoring:
Commit [1] replaced reactive + batched callback with `useEffect` executing
that same batched callback, however `useEffect` is already batched starting from
the second call, effectively batching twice, which resulted in the wrong
dimensions being computed for knowledge comments in the comments_handler

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/ab1e2cad9a214a1303e13fdff0e8a62781ef56ee

task-6370985

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123339

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123288
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120143

Issue
-----
When using Sendcloud batch deliveries, users get a traceback if the transfer is split into multiple packages.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Setup Sendcloud
	- Enable batch delivery
- Create a delivery for 2 units of a product
	- Delivery method set to sendcloud
- Put each unit in a separate package
- Validate the delivery

> Traceback

Cause
-----
Bug introduced by #90302 (so only present in 19.3+).

When using the batch deliveries option, the packages are sent in a single list. This means that, in `_prepare_parcel`, when we iterate over the packages, `pkg` can be a list

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2c89c8e5da7dcb83d5a60c9616de4d5d07f0b9ab/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L462

This means that `pkg.name` will fail

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2c89c8e5da7dcb83d5a60c9616de4d5d07f0b9ab/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L481

Considering that a batch delivery uses the same reference number on all labels, we can pass `None` as a fallback to `_get_unique_order_number_reference` (it is an accepted value)

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2c89c8e5da7dcb83d5a60c9616de4d5d07f0b9ab/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L388-L393

-----
Ticket:
opw-6267928

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120206

The `body` field on `whatsapp.message` was defined with `related_sudo=False` with the intent of restricting access to messages from restricted records. However, this was never actually providing any security value because [`mail.message.fetch()`] was overriding it with `self.sudo()` till `v19.1`, meaning the body was always fetched as superuser regardless:
```py
    web_search_read() -> search_fetch()
    -> fields.py _compute_related()
    -> record[self.related_field.name]  # triggers fetch of mail.message.body
    -> models.py _fetch_field()
    -> mail_message.py fetch()
    -> self = self.sudo()  # sudo hack overrides related_sudo=False silently
```
In `v19.2`, the `fetch()` sudo hack was intentionally removed (see commit odoo/odoo@4727f12d274a0b2d7c455363d189565bd8fb2e7a) as access rights are now cached and can be checked without a performance penalty. This exposed the broken `related_sudo=False` which now causes an `AccessError` when trying to read the body of a `whatsapp.message` whose linked `mail.message` points to a document the current user cannot access (e.g. `purchase.order`).

Access control on `whatsapp.message` is already correctly enforced at the `ir.rule` level:
- Regular users can only see messages they created (`create_uid = user.id`)
- WA Admins can see all messages

We have upgrade requests failing on this issue: TBG-[2765]

[`mail.message.fetch()`]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/saas-19.1/addons/mail/models/mail_message.py#L812-L819
[2765]: https://upgrade.odoo.com/odoo/tbg/2765?debug=1

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119867

When scanning a package then a package type, from the point of view of the user nothing happend, and in the backend it will created a new package but it will not link it to the products nor will it show any warning.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Install barcode and stock
* Enable packages in settings
* Open Inventory
* Create a product,
* Create a Package Type -> barcode PACKTYPE,
* Create a Package linked to this package type -> PACK,
* Add at least 2 unit of product to this package,
* Create a delivery for 2 unit of the product,

Open Barcode
* Operation > Delivery orders > your delivery
* Erase the destination package from the first line
* Scan PACK
( don't click on the green line)
* Scan PACKTYPE

**Actual behavior**
create a new package but does not link it to the new products

**Expected behavior**
create a new package and set it as destination package.

Observation:
-------------
When scanning the package (PACK), we will go through ```_processPackage``` -> ```async _processPackage``` where in the end the line is unselected:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/39d8a473fe03038ca0494a6a8165e3eb75bd8492/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2090

When we scan our package type (PACKTYPE), we will go to ``` _processPackage``` -> ```_processPackage```->```_processPackageType```  
where we will obtains packagesIds checking that we have a source package:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cd9834d1d918f12dec43844cae6f112309e5772/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2123-L2132
and will send us to ```_putPackInPack```:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7cd9834d1d918f12dec43844cae6f112309e5772/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2133-L2136

Where we will avoid the empty packageIds since we checked on the source package and not the destination package:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2b887d094c66be7aebd92fbf735b1852f5dde4b5/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2296-L2299
and will call ```action_put_in_pack``` from the packaging model:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/2b887d094c66be7aebd92fbf735b1852f5dde4b5/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L2301-L2306

In ```action_put_in_pack``` will create a new packaging and put it as a the new destination package, but since the ```previous_dest_package``` (saved in db) was itself, he will [erase the link](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/cda011dc8590773f6c3a26f4ae9d5242a3147024/addons/stock/models/stock_package.py#L354-L363) he just made.

Which means that in our case, we created a package without linking it to anything.

Even if we avoid the function to erase the destination package, since the destination package shown in barcode is the one from move line :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d0d0a3cf4a02bf24cf502b533e494fe7ca155eb3/stock_barcode/static/src/components/line.js#L115-L117
It will not show the new package in barcode


opw-5449729

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120335
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#104876

Steps to Reproduce
---
- Create two different working schedules with different public holidays
- Assign employees to specific working schedules
- Set company default working schedule to a different schedule
- Login as employee with specific working schedule
- Navigate to Timesheets app -> My Timesheets
- Observe public holidays and personal time-off displayed in the timesheet grid

Issue
---
- The timesheet grid displays unavailable dates (public holidays, weekends) from the company's default working schedule instead of the employee's assigned working schedule.
- Personal time-off requests are not reflected as unavailable dates in the timesheet grid.

Current Behaviour
---
- Public holidays shown are always from the company's default working schedule, ignoring employee-specific working schedule assignments.
- Employee's approved time-off requests don't appear as unavailable in the timesheet.

Expected Behaviour
---
- Public holidays should display based on the employee's assigned working schedule, with company schedule as fallback only when no specific schedule is assigned.
- Employee's personal time-off requests should appear as unavailable dates.
- This should align with Time Off app behavior.

Fix
---
- Included employee-specific work interval calculation with personal time-off requests.
- Added support for contract-based calendar changes and calendar validity periods.
- Implemented proper fallback when valid intervals are not found.

task-4997080

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123331
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#95458

## Issue
When using the *Auto Plan* feature on a planning slot with a Role and a Project set, a resource which operated on the same project will be chosen if available, without taking into account the Role set on the slot.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install Project Planning (`project_forecast`)
2. In Planning > Configuration > Roles, create two planning roles A and B
    - Role A: Assign a resource R
    - Role B: No resource
3. Open Planning (Schedule by Resource), and go back a few weeks (to prevent overlaps with potential demo data)
4. Create two new slots:
    1. Set Role B and a random Project P, then click Auto Plan: there should be no available resource (because we didn't set any resource for Role B)
    2. Set Role A and the same Project P, then click Auto Plan: it should assign the resource R assigned to Role A
5. After assigning a resource to the slot for Role A, edit the Open Shift for Role B again and click Auto Plan: **it assigns the same resource R, even though that resource is not assigned to Role B.**

## Cause
The `_get_open_shifts_resources` override in `project_forecast` looks for resources that were assigned to slots related to the same project. It does not filter resources based on the requested role.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/885edbc270a86ab76e0a6eff4acb5767c0fe29d1/project_forecast/models/planning_slot.py#L104-L116

This means that resources that are not part of the requested role can be assigned to the slot, as long as the resource operated on another slot for the same project.

opw-6325744

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122813
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122035

Version:
--------
- 18.0+

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `quality_mrp`
- Create a manufactured product with a BoM
- Create a Quality Point for the `Manufacturing` operation of that product
- Create and confirm multiple Manufacturing Orders
- Verify that each MO generates a quality check
- From the MO list view, select the MOs and merge them from the gear menu(merge)

Issue:
------
When Manufacturing Orders are merged, All MOs are cancelled but it keep their
quality checks in the 'To Do' state.

As a result:
- The quality checks remain linked to cancelled MOs
- The 'Quality Checks' smart button is still displayed on cancelled MOs

Expected behavior:
------------------
- Pending quality checks should be deleted when the MO is cancelled
- The 'Quality Checks' smart button should no longer be displayed

Cause:
------
A previous fix introduced logic to remove pending quality checks when a
Manufacturing Order is cancelled:
odoo-dev@db93bd2

This logic was implemented in `action_cancel()` by unlinking quality
checks associated with the cancelled MO:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/20bc0eb5c2cec67eecd3b44450934e23370b48f2/quality_mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L94-L97

However, when MOs are merged, the merge flow does not call
`action_cancel()`. Instead, it directly invokes `_action_cancel()` on
the source Manufacturing Orders:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/aca0b7289c68fc7a75d47ab313f5f791ebf30f7d/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L2480


Since the quality check cleanup is implemented only in
`action_cancel()`, it is bypassed during the merge process.

As a result, the source MOs are cancelled but their pending quality
checks remain in place.


---

opw-6260735

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121809
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119525

### 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

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

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

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable: "Storage Locations" and "Consignment"
- Create a storable product and put 1 unit in stock with a set owner
- Go to the barcode app > Operations > Delivery Orders > New
- Scan your product and validate
#### > The owner was not set on the stock move line so that a new quant was created and updated in stock rather than using the available unit.

### Cause of the issue:

The mechanism of prefilling an owner or a package in the barcode app is currently gate-kept behind the existence of a lot name: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/0be4f71de3420fb9b72fd4e70d48c6cbbbc0ecb4/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1382-L1407
However, the option also make sense for none tracked products.

### Note:

Performing the flow form the backend and adding quantity will generate the move line by setting the owner if possible since the quantity of a move is set via the back end, move lines are generated by looking at the existing quant data's:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5d61c03b33c9a915684dd59656f8be7612956dd1/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2364 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5d61c03b33c9a915684dd59656f8be7612956dd1/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2328-L2330
Setting the same owner on the new move line as on the quant we are going to reserve:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5d61c03b33c9a915684dd59656f8be7612956dd1/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2337 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5d61c03b33c9a915684dd59656f8be7612956dd1/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1715

Additional subtelties appearing when prefilling for non tracked product:

1. Currently the available quantity is not taken into account to determine if the the value provided to the prefilled is actually
relevant, in particular if there is a quant with an available quantity of 0, it will be used as a valid value to prefill and it will parasit the prefill that could be done by other quants.

2. The location source used to determine the quants taken into account is not set on the first scan since the scan is performed without any existing line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4f0d25f9fe4ca8ff1b0ecd7900899a2a246ba888/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1387
> This was not problematic with respect to tracked product since the product needs to be scanned prior to the lot, hence there is always a current line when the the lot is scanned.

opw-6050657

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122998
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115021

### Steps to reproduce

* Enable the Units of Measure setting and create a packaging UoM for a product (e.g. "Pack of 10").
* Create a customer delivery for that product and confirm it.
* Open the picking in the Barcode app, scan the product unit barcode once, then scan the packaging barcode once.
* Exit the barcode app via the back arrow (without validating).
* Re-open the picking and validate it.

**Expected**: `move.quantity` reads `11` (1 unit + 1 pack of 10).
**Observed**: `move.quantity` reads `2` (the raw count of move lines), while the detailed move lines still show 1 unit and 1 pack of 10.

### Cause

On exit, `BarcodePickingModel._onExit` aggregates `qty_done` and `reserved_uom_qty` across the move lines and forwards the totals to `stock.move.post_barcode_process` -> `_truncate_overreserved_moves`. The aggregation ignored each line's own UoM, so a line in a packaging UoM (e.g. pack of 10) was counted as `1` instead of being converted to the move's UoM. `_truncate_overreserved_moves` then saw the real `move.quantity` (11, correctly computed from the move lines) as exceeding what the user supposedly did (2) and forcibly wrote `move.quantity = 2`. The accompanying `_set_quantity` runs with `unreserve_unpicked_only=True` and therefore skips the picked lines, leaving the move lines intact but `move.quantity` stuck at the wrong value through the validation that follows.

### Fix

Convert each line's quantity to the move's UoM (using the cached `uom.factor`) before aggregating in `_onExit`. `product_uom` is added to `stock.move._get_fields_stock_barcode` so the move's UoM is available in the client-side cache.

### Why 19.0 only

In 18.0 and earlier, scanning a packaging multiplied the scanned quantity in the **product's** UoM (`_retrievePackagingData` returned `quantity = barcodeData.packaging.qty` with `uom = product.uom_id`), so the resulting move lines were all in the same UoM and the raw aggregation was correct. In 19.0 the packaging rework made the scan create a move line in the **packaging's** UoM with `quantity = 1`, which exposed the missing conversion in `_onExit`.

### Test

`test_scan_packaging_on_picking_with_mixed_uom` is extended with a 5th receipt that scans 1 unit + 1 pack of 6, exits via `button.o_exit`, re-opens the picking and validates. Without this fix the assertion `quantity == 7.0` fails (truncated to 2).

On the website booking page, moving to a later month can show no available times even though the weekly schedule clearly has some.

### Steps to reproduce

- Install Appointments.
- Create a recurring appointment type available on a single weekday (say Monday), with a user or resource assigned and a date range spanning a few months.
- Set `Allow bookings at least` (the minimum booking delay) so that the current time plus the delay falls after this month's last Monday. Close to the end of a month, a day or two of delay is enough.
- Open the booking page: the first month shown is next month, because the delay skipped this month's last slot.
- Click the arrow to move forward one more month.

=> the reached month shows no slots, even though it has Monday availability.

### Cause

The calendar computes availability one month at a time. It builds a list of months, and the browser refers to each month by its position in that list (0, 1, 2, ...). Clicking the next arrow sends that position back to the server.

The server turns the position into a real month by adding it to a start month, which it computes as `now` plus the minimum booking delay. But the list shown to the visitor does not start there: it starts at the month of the first slot that can actually be booked.

These two are usually the same, so the position lines up. They stop matching when the delay moves the earliest bookable time past the last availability day of the current month. In the steps above, `now` plus the delay lands after the month's last Monday, so the first bookable slot is a Monday in the next month. The visitor's list then starts one month later than the server assumes, every position points one month too early, and the server computes availability for a month the visitor is not looking at. The reached month comes back empty.

### Fix

Count the visitor's month position from the same first bookable slot the list starts from, instead of from `now` plus the delay. The navigation offset is passed to the slot computation and resolved against that slot, so the filled month always matches the month the visitor sees.

opw-6353569

In Multiwebsite settings, when the public user interactions needs email generation (appointment or event flow), the email links are generated with a base url that does not corresponds to the one from which the request started.

Case 1:
- Have website A and website B
- Create an appointment page website A
- Log in via website B
- As public user, make an appointment in Website A
- Check the generated email

Issue: button links in the email will redirect to the wrong website, so users will encounter an issue when managing the appointment. This occurs because when an user log in, the system parameter 'web.base_url' is updated with the current url.
This parameter is then used as fallback when we need to retrieve the base url without an active record

Case 2:
- Have website A and website B
- Create an event and assign it to website B
- As public user, access the event and register to it
- Check the generated email

Issue: button links in the email will redirect to the wrong website, so users will encounter an issue when managing the event.
This occurs because the record `event.registration` has no website_id field and the base url is taken from the company default website (website A)

Backport with improvements of 15bae202d8f1b5bf70bbc63b2d89025e9237e6cf

opw-4146760
opw-4336369