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#123975
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123633

**Problem:**
On the website, a subscription product page returns a 500 error when a discount is set directly on the recurring plan (a time-based pricing rule with a plan but no pricelist).

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Create a subscription product with a recurring plan.
2. Add a recurring price rule for that plan with no pricelist, set as a percentage discount (base = sales price).
3. Open the product page on the website.

**Current behavior:**
The page fails with a 500: Internal Server Error during price computation.

**Expected behavior:**
The page loads and shows the discounted recurring price.

**Cause of the issue:**
For a recurring price rule based on the sales price, `_compute_base_price` looks up "the no-pricelist rule for the plan" to use as its base, via `_get_applicable_rules_domain(plan_id=...)`. When the discount is set directly on the plan, the rule being computed has no pricelist itself, so that search returns the very same rule and calls `_compute_price` on it again, leading to infinite recursion.

**Fix:**
Excluding the rule itself from the base-rule lookup lets a no-pricelist plan rule resolve its base from the product's sales price (the super() fallback) instead of re-entering its own computation. A rule applied through a pricelist is unaffected, since its no-pricelist base rule is a different record.

opw-6306105

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121466

Bug :
	- Create a new employee (also works with old employees)
	- Create an allocation of Paid Time Off that is available in the future.
	- Create a Time Off request for this employee in the future.
	- When Selecting Time off type you'll see that he has (0 remaining out of 0 days) even though he has just be allocated leaves. 

Reason :

clicking on the many2one field => triggers web_name_search (line 53 in web/models/modeld.py) => triggers name_search (line 1514 in orm/models.py) , here we fetch the searched records with sudo , and when switching to sudo we call a function called clean_context this function (line 952 in odoo/tools/misc.py) remove elements from the context that start with the prefix default_ , in our case , we when clicking on the field we pass the target date through default_date_from , thus we lose it , and instead we make the calculations as if the target date was today

Fix :
pass the date_from through 'leave_date_from' given that _ compute_leaves already checks this context entry, this way we make sure to keep our start_date in the context even if we switch to sudo during some point in the calculation.


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273670

When a "Products" snippet is dropped above the variant selector on a product page, selecting a variant displays one of the snippet's products instead of the chosen variant (its image/price take over the page).

Steps to reproduce
===================
1. Create a product with 2+ variants and publish it.
2. Edit the product page, drag any block above the variant selector and add the "Products" dynamic snippet, then save.
3. Select a variant. => The page shows the snippet's first product instead of the variant.

Root cause
==========
`ProductPage._getCombinationInfo` reads the product ids from `parent.querySelector('button[name="add_to_cart"]')`, with `parent` being the whole `.js_product`. `querySelector` returns the first match in DOM order, and the dynamic "Products" snippet's cards reuse the same `button[name="add_to_cart"]` markup with their own product ids. When the snippet sits above the variants, its button comes first, so `/website_sale/get_combination_info` is called with the snippet product's ids and the page is updated with that product's data.

The interaction was introduced in saas-19.1 (See [1]) and the lookup switched from the unique `#add_to_cart` id to the by-name selector in (See [2]), which is what started matching the snippet's cards.

Fix
===
Pick the first `add_to_cart` button that is not inside a product card (`.oe_product_cart`), i.e. the main product's button.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/4682748e6e3c#diff-7e1a99da9e95d0c4df79ee4d7aa718e46bcb8b7f1ed78cde58782e075c833cd1R326
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/1c732cf75a4a4faa960d6a98f08ae9dbe99b2b69#diff-7e1a99da9e95d0c4df79ee4d7aa718e46bcb8b7f1ed78cde58782e075c833cd1R329

opw-6248285

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#268518