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#124016
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123633

### 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#124017
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115021

## [FIX] industry_fsm_sale: fix invoice status for zero price lines

### Issue:
Without Anglo-Saxon accounting, the system incorrectly sets the invoice status of all zero price sales order lines linked to an FSM task to 'no'

This includes pre-existing lines that were already present on the quotation before confirmation. If a zero price line is pre-existing, it should follow the standard flow and be marked as 'to invoice'
Only lines added as materials from the field service task at a zero price should be considered included in the price and marked as 'no'

### Cause:
In `SaleOrderLine._compute_invoice_status`, the system forced `invoice_status = 'no'` for all zero price lines when Anglo-Saxon accounting was disabled
It failed to check if the lines were actually materials added via the FSM task or original quotation lines

### Fix:
A new `material_sale_lines` compute field is added to `project.task` to distinctly isolate and track lines added specifically as materials during the task execution

In `SaleOrderLine._compute_invoice_status`, the logic is updated to ensure that only zero price lines identified as FSM materials are set to 'no' when Anglo-Saxon accounting is disabled
Other pre-existing zero price lines properly remain as 'to invoice'

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `industry_fsm_sale`
- In Settings > Users & Companies > Companies > Any company, add the field Anglo-Saxon using Studio (In 19.0+)
- Disable Anglo-Saxon on the current company
- Create a product Service (Fixed Price, that create a task in a Field Service Project)
- Create and confirm a Sale Order with the Service and one product with unit price 0
Before the fix, the pre-existing SO line with price 0 is 
incorrectly considered as not to invoice ('no')

opw-6169802

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

## [FIX] industry_fsm_sale: sync sale order invoice status

### Issue:
When a sale order contains FSM material lines with a price of zero and Anglo-Saxon accounting is disabled, the overall sale order invoice status remains stuck on 'to invoice' even after all other invoiceable lines are fully invoiced

### Cause:
The standard `SaleOrder._compute_invoice_status` does not handle FSM business rules regarding zero price material lines that are marked as `invoice_status = 'no'`
Because these lines are never technically invoiced, the global order status fails to transition to 'invoiced'

### Fix:
Override `SaleOrder._compute_invoice_status` to recompute the status of confirmed orders linked to FSM tasks

We use the task's `material_sale_lines` to filter out material components
If all lines on the order are either 'invoiced' or are zero price FSM material lines with Anglo-Saxon disabled, the global sale order status is forced to 'invoiced'

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `industry_fsm_sale`
- In Settings > Users & Companies > Companies > Any company, add the field Anglo-Saxon using Studio (In 19.0+)
- Disable Anglo-Saxon on the current company
- Create a product Service (Fixed Price, that create a task in a Field Service Project)
- Create and confirm a Sale Order with the Service and one product with unit price 0
- Add a Product from the Task (Use a price 0 product, or set the unit price to 0 on the SO)
- Create the invoice for the Sale Order
Before the fix, the Service and Pre-existing product are invoiced, but in the Other Info Tab of the SO, the status stays on 'To Invoice' instead of 'Fully Invoiced'

opw-6169802

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123151
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119238

Cached functions with `@ormcache` should not return immutable values, yet `_get_parameter_from_code()` could return dicts/sets/lists/etc.

It could lead to very obscure bugs such as:

```python
def some_innocent_code():
    category_dict = self.env["hr.rule.parameter"]._get_parameter_from_code('l10n_be_work_entry_categories')
    incapacity_codes = category_dict['partial_incapacity']
    incapacity_codes |= category_dict['total_incapacity']
    # ... then use incapacity_codes

def print_rule_param():
    print(self.env["hr.rule.parameter"]._get_parameter_from_code('l10n_be_work_entry_categories')['partial_incapacity'])

print_rule_param()  # OrderedSet(['LEAVE281'])
some_innocent_code()
print_rule_param()  # OrderedSet(['LEAVE281', 'LEAVE264', 'LEAVE266', 'LEAVE217', 'LEAVE218', 'LEAVE219', 'MEDIC01'])
```

The solution was to either deepcopy the returned value each time, or to change all the rule parameters to their frozen equivalent. Since we don't have access to frozen objects in rule parameters's xml definitions, we opted for the deepcopy approach.

task-6329380

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123058

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

Users in the 'Accounting / Invoicing & Banks' group were encountering an access error when attempting to open the Accounting app.

This was caused by a missing read access right for the `account.return.type` model that is present in previous versions (e.g. saas-19.3). Without this permission, the basic accounting group (`account.group_account_basic`) is blocked from loading the necessary accounting views.

This commit restores the `access_account_return_type_basic` rule, granting read access to the basic accounting group so they can access the app without errors.

opw-6377912

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Sign in as Mitchell Admin
- Settings > Users & Companies > Users > Mitchell Admin > Access Rights > Accounting > Accounting > change to ‘Invoicing & Banks’
- Attempt to access the Accounting app > observe Access Error


**Current behavior before PR:**

- Users in the 'Accounting / Invoicing & Banks' group are unable to access the Accounting app due to Access Error

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

- Users in the 'Accounting / Invoicing & Banks' are able to access the Accounting app

## Issue
When creating or browsing an existing contract in a Luxembourgish company, the current index shown is the one from September 2023 (which was up-to-date until Mai 2025). If the contract is created after Mai 2025, the "Index on Contract Signature" field is also wrong.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Luxembourg - Payroll* (`l10n_lu_hr_payroll`)
2. Using a Luxembourgish company, create a new contract for an employee
    - *Contract Start Date*: Any date after 05/01/2025 (Mai 1st 2025)
3. __The *Index on Contract Signature* shows `944.43`, which is the index from September 2023. It does not match with the most recent indices.__

## Cause
The two most recent indices are missing from the [`rule_parameter_lu_index`](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/885edbc270a86ab76e0a6eff4acb5767c0fe29d1/l10n_lu_hr_payroll/data/rule_parameters/general_rules_data.xml#L4-L58). These indices are:
- `968.04` from 2025-05-01 (Mai 1st 2025)
- `992.24` from 2026-06-01 (June 1st 2026)

These values were taken from [here](https://salary.lu/en/tools/social-parameters/indexation-of-salaries) and double-checked [here](https://lustat.statec.lu/?lc=en&tm=DF_C1201&pg=0&snb=1).

## Tests modification
Updating the latest index had an impact on the tests from the `l10n_lu_hr_payroll_account` (testing the salary rules). In fact, the current index (`l10n_lu_current_index`) is [used to compute the indexed wage](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7892d035ddb968d67a3e8da0daf91292bd8fb499/l10n_lu_hr_payroll/models/hr_contract.py#L24-L33) (`l10n_lu_indexed_wage`), which is then used to compute most lines in the payslip (e.g., the `WAGE_SUPPLEMENT_70`).

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7892d035ddb968d67a3e8da0daf91292bd8fb499/l10n_lu_hr_payroll/data/salary_rules/hr_salary_rule_data.xml#L70-L74

Since the latest index is not the same as when those tests were written, the values are not correct anymore. To prevent this, time was frozen to 01/01/2024 to use the expected index (944.43, from September 2023).

opw-6330790

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122147

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

When a POS user attempts to open the Kitchen Display app from the main dashboard, they are blocked by an Access Error, despite being able to access the interface from within the POS app's sub-menu.

This occurs because the dashboard menu triggers a server action (`action_pos_preparation_display_kitchen_display`) to route the user. When a server action has no explicitly defined `group_ids`, Odoo's `_can_execute_action_on_records` method falls back to requiring `write` access on the underlying model (`pos.prep.display`) to execute the code. Since standard POS users do not have 'write' access to this model, the execution engine blocks the routing attempt.

This commit resolves the issue by explicitly appending the POS User group to the server action's `group_ids`.

opw-6305014

**Steps to reproduce:**

- As Mitchell Admin:
    - Settings > Users & Companies > Users > Marc Demo > Access Rights > Sales > set POS to User
- As Marc Demo:
    - Attempt to access Kitchen Display app > observe Access Error
    - POS > Orders > Preparation Display > observe no error


**Current behavior before PR:**

- POS Users receive an Access Error when attempting to access the Kitchen Display app from the main dashboard

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

- No Access Error when POS Users access the Kitchen Display app

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122531
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121419

Guests never receive any bus notification when the websocket is not handled by Odoo itself but by a proxy that forwards subscriptions through `/websocket/peek_notifications` and dispatches the notifications on its own (which is how Odoo.sh serves databases).

The peek controller calls `ir.websocket._prepare_subscribe_data()` directly, bypassing `_subscribe()`, the only method decorated with `@add_guest_to_context`. The guest cookie is present on the request but never read, so the returned channel list only contains the anonymous channels (broadcast, res.groups) and lacks the guest's personal ones: ("mail.guest", id), ("discuss.channel", id) and presence. The proxy therefore never registers those channels, and every notification targeted at the guest is silently dropped.

Before this commit, discuss calls with a guest are broken: a 2-person call never connects (p2p offers/answers/ICE are delivered over the bus); in a 3+ person call, any guest who joined before the SFU threshold stays stuck in dead p2p (they never receive the `sfu_hot_swap` notification) while a guest joining as 3rd+ participant works, since the join RPC returns the SFU credentials synchronously.

We override `peek_notifications` with `add_guest_to_context` so the route is aware of guests.

opw-5490739

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275184
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274743

**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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275320

## Problem:
when snippets with identical images are added in the e-commerce website product page, the "Optimize SEO" option in debug mode causes an error to occur with a traceback. The traceback calls out a duplicate key in the `t-foreach` of a loop over `state.altAttributes`. the `t-key` for this loop is `img.id` which is generated by the `/website/get_alt_images` controller endpoint.

## Steps to reproduce:
1. Go to a product page and click on "go to website" smart nav btn.
2. Add a snippet with an image in the `description_ecommerce` field
3. Add a snippet with the same image in the `website_description` field.
4. In debug mode, open `site > Optimize SEO`
5. An error `Got duplicate key in t-foreach` is thrown.

## Solution:
The solution was simple to add a qualifier in the compound key generated by the controller action for the `id` field. The chosen qualifier in this case was `model['field']`. `field` is the position in the template where the image came from.

So now the keys for the two identical images go 

FROM
 
> `${model}-${id}-${index}`
>
> 1st image of `website_description`:
>    `product.template-6-0`
> 
> 1st image of `description_ecommerce`:
>    `product.template-6-0`

TO

> `${model}-${id}-${field}-${index}`
>
> 1st image of `website_description`:
>    `product.template-6-website_description-0`
>
> 1st image of `description_ecommerce`:
>    `product.template-6-description_ecommerce-0`

task-6325786

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275941
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272846

Step to reproduce:
- install pos_discount and l10n_es_edi_tbai_pos with demo data
- start pos, add a product and a discount of 10%
- fulfill the order
- go to backend and open that order
- from "TicketBai" page, open the "TicketBAI Post File" xml file

Observation:
- `ImporteUnitario` and `ImporteTotal` were exported as positive values for discount lines.

cause:
- Commit [1] assumed tax details are always positive.
- This is not generally true, in case we have price_unit < 0
- The logic relied on `is_refund`, which depends on `qty * price`.
- `_l10n_es_tbai_get_values` then multiplied values by `-1` again for refunds.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e751fa1e010dbda63903d598048ef415709b4af4/addons/l10n_es_edi_tbai_pos/models/pos_order.py#L177-L181
- For discount lines, `is_refund = True` and `price = -10`, resulting in `-10 * -1 = 10`.

Fix:
-  Ensure tax detail values are always returned as positive values, matching the assumption introduced in commit [1]

[1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/03d55104e49aa65aa4c6475e199747fe9132e754

opw-6226003

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275451
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265777

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a new version on an employee with a future start date
2. Ensure the new version has a different working schedule
3. After the new version becomes active, observe that the working schedule on the employees record is different from the one on the employee's resource record

Every employee has an associated resource record associated with them. Normally, the employee's working schedule (`hr_employee.resource_calendar_id`) should always be in sync with their associated resource record (`hr_employee.resource_id.calendar_id`). When we update the employee's working schedule through the UI on a currently active version, it will also update their associated resource record with the same working schedule. However, if we change the working schedule for a future version, when `_cron_update_current_version_id()` runs and changes the active version, there is no mechanism to update the associated resource with the new working schedule. This change will ensure we keep the working schedules in sync, as if they are not, strange behaviors can occur.

One side effect of this problem: When a new version becomes active, and working schedules become de-synced, this can cause the Attendance gannt view to display incorrect unavailable intervals for an employee (this appears as a grayed-out time slot). This is because `_attendance_intervals_batch()` pulls from the working schedule of an employee's associated resource record, rather than the employee record itself. This is what occurred on the linked ticket.

[opw-6352770](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/my-tasks/6352770?debug=assets)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275430

# How to reproduce
- In the settings, enable Absence Mangement
- Create an employee with a Contract
- Create a Time off for that employee for yesterday
- Manually run the scheduled action "Attendance: Detect Absences for employees"
- Go to the attendance dashboard for that employee

# The issue
An attendance with no overtime was created for yesterday for that employee with a log note
saying "This attendance was automatically created to cover an unjustified absence on that day."
However, the absence was justified as the employee took a time off.

# Cause of the issue
When running the `_cron_absence_detection` cron job, we create "empty" attendances for the employees
that were absent yesterday. If those attendance's `overtime_hours` are 0, then we unlink them :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/a73428187112b3948a11810abae2a3c82c9c7bcd/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance.py#L659-L666

But, since `check_in` and `check_out` cannot be the same, we cannot really create an empty attedance.
We instead create an attendance of 1 second :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/a73428187112b3948a11810abae2a3c82c9c7bcd/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance.py#L652-L653

This will create an overtime of 0.003 seconds if there was a leave that day (which is our case).
This duration will be reflected in the attendance's `overtime_hours`. The issue is that we simply do
`== 0` when trying to find the attendances without overtime, so we don't unlink them.

The issue was introduced by :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8d7859a569d9ac7303ca0b9be6c56496be14c544

Because `round(0.003, 3)` => 0 but `round(0.003, 4)` => 0.003

The issue is not present in 18.0+ because we don't create overtime if the duration is
`float_is_zero(overtime_duration, 2)` :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/39cce855aa27aa4af9225a61a3e1425383a9f49f/addons/hr_attendance/models/hr_attendance.py#L405

opw-6321883

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275133
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272089

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

opw-6285739

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274663
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271440

### Issue:
When creating a new Indian company, the `Half Up` cash rounding is reassigned to the new company instead of being duplicated
Previous Indian companies lose access to it, causing errors when opening invoices that reference the cash rounding if the user doesn't have access to that company

### Cause:
`cash_rounding_in_half_up` was defined as a `data` record with a fixed XML ID (`l10n_in.cash_rounding_in_half_up`) `_get_in_account_cash_rounding` referenced that XML ID directly and set `company_id` to the current company on each chart of accounts installation
This reassigned the single shared record to the new company instead of creating a new one

Moving the definition to the `@template` decorator without a module-prefixed XML ID lets the chart of accounts system create one record per company, as intended

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_in` and switch to `IN Company`
- Check the Cash Rounding records grouped by company
- Create a new Indian company
- Enable both `IN Company` and the new company
- Check the Cash Rounding records grouped by company again

Before the fix, only the last created Indian company has the Cash Rounding record

opw-6318857

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272866

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a promotion program (e.g. "10% discount on your order", reward_point_mode "per order") and restrict its rule to a specific product A; leave the minimum quantity at 0
- Open a PoS session and add any other product B to the order

Issue:
The discount was applied even though the order contained none of the rule's valid products.

Cause:
In `pointsForPrograms`, a rule was only gated on its quantity and amount thresholds (`totalProductQty < rule.minimum_qty`), never on the actual presence of a valid product in the order. Program templates (promotion, promo_code, next_order_coupons) create rules with minimum_qty = 0, so a product-restricted rule passed with zero matching items and, in "order" point mode, granted its points unconditionally. The same hole existed in `_canGenerateRewards` for scanned coupon programs, where rules act as conditions.

The backend does not have this issue: `_program_check_compute_points` in sale_loyalty skips any rule whose valid products are not present in the order.

Fix:
Mirror the backend behavior in the PoS frontend: skip a product-restricted rule in `pointsForPrograms` when no (non-reward) order line matches its valid products, and make `_canGenerateRewards` return false in the same situation. Gift card and eWallet flows are unaffected since their "money"/"unit" point modes already gave 0 points when the trigger product was absent.

opw-6357241

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275073