The partner credit limit warning on quotations and customer invoices depends on which company the user is currently working in, instead of the company of the document itself.

Steps to reproduce:
- Enable Sale Credit Limit in the settings of My Company (San Francisco)
- Set a Credit Limit of 100 on a customer, e.g. Deco Addict
- Create a draft quotation of 500 for that customer => The credit limit warning banner is displayed, as expected
- Switch the active company to any other company, for example My Company (Chicago), keeping access to both companies
- Open the same quotation again => The warning banner is gone, although neither the quotation nor the
   customer changed

The credit fields used to build the warning are evaluated against the user's active company: credit_limit is a company-dependent field, and credit / credit_to_invoice are computed on the receivables of the current company. When the active company is not the document's company, the warning is checked against the wrong ledger and the wrong limit, so it can disappear on an over-limit customer or show up for a healthy one.

Both computes already contain the line that was meant to handle this, but the result of with_company() was discarded, making it a no-op. Assign it, as every other compute in these files already does, so the warning is always evaluated in the document's company.

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

Steps to produce: 

1) Install Manufacturing & enable "Work Order Dependencies" in the settings
2) Make a new BOM with 2 operations
3) Check "Operation Dependencies" in the miscellaneous tab on the BOM's form view.
4) Configure the first sequential operation to be blocked by the second
5) Make and confirm an MO using this BOM
6) Uncheck "Operation Dependencies" on the BOM
7) Press "Plan" on the MO, a validation error is thrown stating "You cannot create cyclic dependency."

Issue occurs because after the MO is confirmed the blocked_by_workorder_ids field for mrp.workorder records is set based on the order manually configured on the BOM (operation 1 is blocked by operation 2). After the BOM is edited to have allow_operation_dependencies = false, then Odoo uses the default sequential ordering when planning the operations (operation 2 is blocked by operation 1). Since the old ordering is never cleared, a cycle is created unintentionally. 

This PR resolves this issue by clearing the blocked_by_workorder_ids field on mrp.workorder records. 
[Ticket](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6334271?debug=assets)

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

When searching on the Website site, using the main search on the navbar, it opens a list view with the results (`website.list_hybrid`) which raises the warning on the logs (2 times):
"Unknown directives or unused attributes: {'t-key'} in website.list_hybrid"

![Task 79454 - Issue 434 - Image of Warnings](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f5a3100b-c617-4c38-a8b5-f42427a4317c)

This happens after the attribute `t-key` was added to the template [\[1\]] because the template is only used in QWeb. The validation for them doesn't include the `t-key` [\[2\]] as one of the "iter_directives" nor has a `_compile_directive_*` method to check and remove it from the validation as it's done with the `t-as` and `t-foreach`.

This also causes the raise of the warnings on tours that use the tour method `searchProduct` (of the module `website_sale`) because it uses the first input with the name of search and happens to be the search on the navbar.

![Task 79454 - Issue 434 - Search Input](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/923f5d63-5cfb-4c0b-a563-0eabc04882bb)

[\[1\]]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/7b1d82aa
[\[2\]]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f52cfb09/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_qweb.py#L1400

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

Translatable rows that are identified by a stable key rather than by
their text (e.g. selection option labels in ir.model.fields.selection,
and other module-reflected metadata written through upsert_en()) can
have their English source text changed by a module upgrade while
keeping the same key. For example product.template's selection value
'consu' went from meaning "Consumable" to meaning "Goods" between 17.0
and 18.0, without the stored value itself changing.

In that situation, upsert_en() always refreshes the 'en_US' entry from
the current code, so English is never wrong. But every other language
keeps whatever value it had, since upsert_en() blindly merges the new
'en_US' entry into the existing jsonb without checking whether the
previous 'en_US' value actually changed. When the module's .po file is
later reloaded, TranslationImporter.save() finds a non-empty value
already there for each language and, by design, does not overwrite it
unless explicitly asked to (`overwrite`) on a record that isn't
`noupdate`. That protection is correct when the English text hasn't
changed (it keeps manual translation customizations across upgrades),
but here it ends up protecting a translation of a source string that
no longer exists.

As a result, a value whose meaning changes across versions keeps
showing its old label in every language except English, forever,
unless someone forces a translation overwrite.

Fix this in upsert_en() itself: when the incoming 'en_US' value
differs from the one currently stored, drop every other language
already stored for that row instead of merging into it. Those
translations were made for a source string that no longer exists, so
there is nothing worth protecting. Once dropped, they are simply
missing from the jsonb, so TranslationImporter.save() naturally lets
the freshly (re)loaded translations in on its next run, without needing
to know anything about source drift, and `overwrite`/`noupdate` keep
their exact original meaning for every other case.

Task-6333080


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