**Steps to reproduce:**
- Create a fiscal position T1, with detect automatically
- Create another one T2, without the detect automatically
- When looking at the fiscal positions list, make sure T1 is on top, followed by T2
- Go to the PoS settings, check flexible taxes
- Put T2 as default and in allowed, don't put T1 in allowed
- Go to the PoS, chose a customer
- The fiscal position is T1 even though it's not allowed

**Why the fix:**

Currently, the fiscal position is chosen like this in order:
- A FP specified on the customer's profile
- A FP detected with the detect automatically setting
- The default FP from the PoS settings

When we have a tie, it's the first one in the fiscal positions list that is chosen.

Before this commit, we did not check that the fiscal position was allowed to be used in the PoS, so we just fetched whatever fiscal position fit the best for a given customer and didn't check if we could actually use it.

We now make sure that the fiscal position we try to use is allowed in the current PoS, and if it's not we fall back to the default one.

opw-6032031

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276151
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271343

Steps to reproduce:
===================
1. Drop an "Events" block on a website page.
2. In edit mode, try selecting the inner text by clicking multiple times.

=> Uncaught client error: TypeError: Cannot read properties of
   undefined (reading 'nodeType').

Root cause:
===========
When a mouse selection crosses an uncrossable element, the selection restriction plugin moves the focus to the deepest position of the element sibling adjacent to the uncrossable one.

When the first selected node is itself an uncrossable element (event cards are `div` elements) that has no previous/next element sibling, `node.previousElementSibling` is null and `tempFocusNode` was never assigned by a previous iteration, so it is undefined. `nodeSize` then reads `nodeType` on undefined and throws.

The plugin only exists from saas-19.3, which is why the issue is not reproducible on earlier versions.

Fix:
====
When there is no sibling to place the focus on, fall back to the boundary just outside the uncrossable node itself (`leftPos` when selecting left to right, `rightPos` when selecting right to left) instead of calling `nodeSize`/`getDeepestPosition` with undefined.

opw-6362955


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274739

Before this commit:
- When importing a **UBL** or **Factur-X (CII)** invoice, Odoo determines whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note based on the `TaxExclusiveAmount (UBL)` /` TaxBasisTotalAmount (Factur-X)`.
- In some rare cases, a valid invoice can contain a negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` while still having a positive `TaxInclusiveAmount` / `GrandTotalAmount`. 
- In such situations, Odoo incorrectly imports the document as a credit note.

Technical reason:
- The method `_get_import_document_amount_sign()` uses `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount `to determine whether the imported document is an invoice or a refund.

After this commit:
- **UBL** now uses `TaxInclusiveAmount` instead of `TaxExclusiveAmount`, and **Factur-X** now uses `GrandTotalAmount `instead of `TaxBasisTotalAmount` to determine whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note.
- Prevent valid invoices with negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` from being incorrectly converted into credit notes.

Task-6321262

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276307
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271829

The translate button next to a translatable field saves the record before opening the translation dialog for its id. Since https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/a85ca9679e3855936afc66b034d05d75f672dd26 it saves record.model.root rather than the record itself. When the field belongs to a new record still edited inside an x2many, for example an answer added in the survey question popup, saving the root only saves the parent and the new line keeps no database id. The dialog then opens with the id set to false and calls update_field_translations on it, which builds WHERE id = false and the database rejects it with operator does not exist: integer = boolean.

Such a record gets no id of its own, and after a save and reload there is no reliable way to match the saved line back to the one that was clicked, so the dialog can never open for it. A canTranslate getter in TranslationButton returns false for a new record whose model root is another record, which is exactly a line still edited inside an x2many, and the template only renders the button when it is true. The variant in editable lists, where model.root is a list rather than a record, was handled in https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/cb34b318004c3ca9db755d8dbbad429609220df3.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Activate a second language in Settings > Translations > Languages
2. Open the Surveys app and create a survey
3. Add a question, then in the Answers tab add a line and type a value
4. Click the EN button next to the answer, fill the second language, and Save

=> RPC error operator does not exist: integer = boolean from WHERE id = false

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6260427)
opw-6260427

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275401
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267781

### Steps to Reproduce:

- Insert text in the editor and select it.
- Open the font size dropdown from the toolbar and select a font size.
- Once editor focus returns to the editable area, type any character.
- Observe that the editor throws a traceback.

### Purpose of this PR:

- When selecting text & changing its font size or font family, typing character deletes selection and empties the formatting element. The editor converts this empty element to a pending format intent, but it previously discarded the format's parameters (like class names, sizes, or font-family names). When editor later tried to apply format to newly typed character, it crashed because properties were undefined.

### Solution:

- Implements a `getProps` method on font-size and font-family format specs to extract their properties before deletion.
- Updates `convertEmptyFormatToPendingIntent` to save these properties.
- Makes `addStyle` robust against empty properties using optional chaining.

task-6377076

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

When the pos_discount module is installed while a session is open (the typical case: the user enables "Global Discounts" in the PoS settings while the PoS is running), `_default_discount_value_on_module_install` skipped the configs having a non-closed session (or any rescue session, even a closed one). Those configs ended up with the Global Discount feature enabled but no `discount_product_id`, and opening the PoS then raised "A discount product is needed to use the Global Discount feature." with no way to recover other than manually re-saving the PoS settings.

The skip was introduced in 13.0 by 4c4adf472453 because, at the time, `pos.config.write()` refused any modification while a session was open, which made the module installation crash. That blanket restriction has since been narrowed to a few specific fields (`module_pos_restaurant`, `payment_method_ids`, `active`), so writing `discount_product_id` on a config with an open session is now perfectly valid.

Remove the obsolete exclusion so that all configs get the default discount product at install time, regardless of their session state.

opw-6385274

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276537

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Make a product with a category
- In the category, make the inventory valuation to automated
- Set the income and expense account
- Set a cost for the product
- Make a fiscal position and set it as default for the PoS
- In the Account Mapping tab, map the income and expense to two other accounts
- Go to the PoS
- Make a sale for that product, without invoice
- Close the session and in the backend check the session
- Check the journal entries
- The income account has been mapped to the fiscal position's
- The outcome account stayed the same as in the category's

**Why the fix:**

When we invoice an order, the income and expense accounts are immediately updated, in a different place than if it has not been invoiced.

At the session's closure, we update the accounts for every order that hasn't been invoiced. In this flow, the account mapping defined on the fiscal position was not applied, so we took the one defined on the product's category.
The income account was already mapped as we need to do it earlier than the session closure, so it had already been set as the right one before our flow. For the expense account, we only need it at this specific time, so we can map it as the session's closure.

We now map the account depending on the fiscal position if we are able to find one, otherwise, we use the category's default as we did before.

opw-6171677

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276715
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266700

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a promotions program with a rule granting 1 point per currency unit spent (minimum 2 items and 50.00 spent) and a reward "10% discount on the cheapest product" for 1 point
- Open a PoS session and add 2 products to trigger the program
- Keep adding products to the order

Issue:
A new "10% on the cheapest product" line is added for every product added. In eCommerce and Sales the discount is only applied once.

Cause:
The rule grants far more points than the reward costs, so the reward remains claimable after being applied. The auto-claim loop of `updateRewards` therefore re-applies it on every order change, stacking one discount line per change. The already-applied check in `getClaimableRewards` only covered 'coupons' programs, while `_get_claimable_rewards` in sale_loyalty also skips discount rewards already present on the order lines.

Solution:
When auto-claiming, skip discount rewards that are already applied on the order, unless they belong to a payment program (ewallet, gift card). The reward can still be claimed manually several times through the Reward button by spending more points.

opw-6380421

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276300

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a partner without pincode
- Create a picking and Challan for that partner
- Click print

Will result in the following traceback-
```py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<1103>", line 710, in template_l10n_in_ewaybill_report_ewaybill_1103
  File "<1103>", line 692, in template_l10n_in_ewaybill_report_ewaybill_1103_content
  File "<1103>", line 674, in template_l10n_in_ewaybill_report_ewaybill_1103_t_call_0
  File "<1103>", line 86, in template_l10n_in_ewaybill_report_ewaybill_1103_t_call_1
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 727, in _ewaybill_generate_direct_json
    **self._prepare_ewaybill_base_json_payload(),
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill_stock/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 289, in _prepare_ewaybill_base_json_payload
    ewaybill_json = super()._prepare_ewaybill_base_json_payload()
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 669, in _prepare_ewaybill_base_json_payload
    **prepare_details(
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 641, in prepare_details
    f"{place}{key}": fun(partner, place) if key == "StateCode" else fun(partner)
                                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 674, in <lambda>
    "Pincode": lambda p: int(p.zip) if p.country_id.code == "IN" else 999999,
                         ^^^^^^^^^^
ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: ''
```
In this commit, we resolve the traceback


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276180

**Description of the problem**
The age verification popup snippet (`s_age_verification_popup`) does not work properly when dropped into the `#product_details` element of a product page. In particular, the popup is rendered below the blurred background and cannot be interacted with (it should be rendered above the blur instead).

**How to reproduce**
1. Open a product page.
2. Drop `s_age_verification_popup` into the product details.
3. The popup is rendered below the blurred background.

**Why the problem happens**
The `s_age_verification_popup` snippet applies the blur effect to the `#wrapwrap` element. The popup is expected to be rendered above the blur thanks to its `z-index`.
However, `z-index` only applies within the same stacking context. A child element cannot be rendered above elements outside its parent's stacking context, regardless of how high its own `z-index` is. Since `#product_details` has a defined `z-index`, it creates a stacking context. As a result, the popup, which is a child of `#product_details`, is rendered below the blur element.

**Fix**
This commit adds an SCSS rule to `#product_details` so that it no longer creates a stacking context when it contains an open age verification popup. To prevent the stacking context from being created, `z-index` is set to `auto` and `position` to `relative`.

task-6358990

**Purpose of this PR:**

Before this PR, the Voice detection sensitivity indicator in call settings could get stuck showing the last detected level after clicking "Stop" right after "Test". The `AudioWorkletNode`'s port kept receiving tic messages briefly after `disconnect()`, since disconnecting only unroutes the audio graph and does not stop the worklet from posting pending messages.

<img width="546" height="73" alt="voice_test_bug" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/05a10d23-fe60-4a85-b906-bfec6d235ec5" />

Steps to reproduce:

1. Open Voice & Video Settings.
2. Start the Voice detection sensitivity test.
3. Quickly click Stop immediately after clicking Test.
4. It may take a few tries, but eventually the Voice detection sensitivity indicator remains stuck at the last detected level.

> [!NOTE]
>  this is timing-dependent. A tic message must already be in-flight from the worklet thread when `disconnect()` runs, so it won't happen every attempt.

This race condition existed in the `disconnect` callback of `_loadAudioWorkletProcessor` since #66611, but stayed silent until #183969 introduced the Voice detection sensitivity feature in call settings, exposing it.

This PR clears `port.onmessage` before disconnecting so late tic messages can no longer update the Voice detection sensitivity indicator after monitoring has stopped.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275933

\* : html_editor

Commit [1]:

Steps to reproduce: replacing image stuck issue when deleted
1. Go to Website > Edit.
2. Add any picture snippet (e.g., Text-Image).
3. Click the 'Replace' button and upload an image.
4. Open the media dialog again and delete the uploaded image.
5. Click the 'Discard' button.
6. Try to save the changes.

Issue:
- The website gets stuck in the same position and does not allow saving.
- In the Python terminal, a missing error warning appears because the image is deleted from both `ir.ui.view` and `ir.attachment`.

Expected behaviour:
- Saving should be allowed with a default image, that is similar to other images.

This commit catch the warning response and replaces the deleted image, allowing the website to save changes without getting stuck.

Commit [2]: resolve traceback when leaving edit mode via browser

Steps to reproduce:
1. Go to Website > Edit.
2. Open the snippet modal and select any snippet.
3. Press the 'Back' button in your browser.
4. A dialog will appear asking to discard changes; click 'OK'.
5. A traceback error occurs, and an empty space appears in the editor.

Issue:
- Previously, a commit addressed a similar scenario, but that time the browser had an event listener bind on hashchange.
- Now, that `hashchange` event of browser has been replaced with `popstate`, which triggers before the 'window' event listener.
- As a result, the editor is left in an unstable state, causing a traceback error.

Solution:
- This commit ensures the 'window' event executes before the browser event.
- It verifies if the editor is open and forces a `skipLoad`, preventing the `route_change` call in the browser.

task-4570164

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275693
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#199193

Step to reproduce:
- install l10n_sa_edi_pos in fresh db, make sure to have a saudi arabia company
- go to sales journal -> zatca page (journal should not be onboarded_
- open pos and make a sale -> print receipt

Observaton:
- in receipt notice a label "This is not a legal document"
- such labels should only appear when we are on phase 2 i.e. we onboard journal

Cause:
- after the commit [1] we removed dependency b/w account_edi and l10n_sa
- Also, visibilty of label dependends on
 - `l10n_sa_not_legal` , `code_sa` and  `l10n_gcc_is_settlement`
- here we never checked, which phase we are in [1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/1c463a4d5b513fcf17a9ea0ea26bf50f68102193

fix:
- we keep track, if config's journal is onboarderd or not (by presense of csid)
and only then we decided to print label (if applicable)

Before:

<img width="1829" height="1040" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/581923c0-513c-45dc-8b77-6ab171dc0522" />


After:
<img width="1827" height="1037" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/dfdfde21-c17d-4468-9629-9ac1fd6d691c" />


opw-6317777

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

Before this commit:
- When importing a **UBL** or **Factur-X (CII)** invoice, Odoo determines whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note based on the `TaxExclusiveAmount (UBL)` /` TaxBasisTotalAmount (Factur-X)`.
- In some rare cases, a valid invoice can contain a negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` while still having a positive `TaxInclusiveAmount` / `GrandTotalAmount`. 
- In such situations, Odoo incorrectly imports the document as a credit note.

Technical reason:
- The method `_get_import_document_amount_sign()` uses `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount `to determine whether the imported document is an invoice or a refund.

After this commit:
- **UBL** now uses `TaxInclusiveAmount` instead of `TaxExclusiveAmount`, and **Factur-X** now uses `GrandTotalAmount `instead of `TaxBasisTotalAmount` to determine whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note.
- Prevent valid invoices with negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` from being incorrectly converted into credit notes.

Task-6321262

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276307
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271829

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable Multi-Steps route
- Unarchive the MTO route and set its production rule in MTSO
- Create 3 products: P1, P2 and COMP all using the MTO route
- Create 2 BOM's, one for P1 and one for P2: 1 X COMP
- Put 2 units of COMP in stock and add an empty bom (to trigger a child MO creation in case the MTSO route is triggered)
- Create and confirm a sale order for: 1 x P1 and 1 X P2
#### > An MO was generated for both product but P2 also generated a child MO for 1 unit of COMP instead of using the available unit

Cause of the issue:

The issue happens in the `_prepare_procurement_qty` which incorrectly assess that 1 unit of COMP will be required. The issue has been introduced by commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/e30fb722c00805e7226d2ee9e3e587b3c2204840 which introduced a dictionary to keep track of units of  products that will be used by the confirmation process of other concurrent mtso moves: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1683-L1689 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1712-L1715 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1810-L1814 
While by design this propagates the information used by other mtso moves in a common `_action_confirm` stack, the issue that we encounter is that this quantity is only relevant to be substracted to the free_qty when the unit is not yet reserved and hence already accounted negatively in `free_qty`. However, in the present case, confirming the receipt of P1 and P2 will confirm both moves simultaneously, triggering a common `_run_manufacture` to generate both an MO for P1 and for P2. At this point the dictionary `consumed_from_stock_dict` is shared in both MO's confirmation but since the MO's are confirmed sequentially rather than in batch:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/mrp/models/stock_rule.py#L122-L125
The confirmation of the MO of P1 will update the `consumed_from_stock_dict` for 1 unit of COMP and will also reserve 1 unit of COMP before the MO of P2 is confirmed (and calls the `_prepare_procurement_qty`) to determine how many units of COMP are till available. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that 1 - 1 = 0 units are still available to fulfill the demand of P2.

opw-6370298

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275539

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276308

**Steps to reproduce:**
- create storable avco product
- set the cost to 10 
- set an onhand quantity of 100 in WH/stock
- create another warehouse (if you don't already 
have another one)
- create an internal transfer from WH/Stock 
to WH2
- open the 'stock' view 
- click on inventory at date 
- confirm

**Current behavior:**
the total value is 11.000

**Expected behavior:**
total value should be 10.000

**Cause of the issue:**
To compute the total_value of the product, 
_compute_value calls _run_average_batch
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/68f258e99f42693131a5309b3606c3b95f93d824/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L260
Inside run_average_batch we need the qty_available 
at the time of last manual value (which is when 
we set the cost to 10 manually) in order to value 
all this quantity at the value of the manual value.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/68f258e99f42693131a5309b3606c3b95f93d824/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L435

This qty should be 0 cause we had no onhand quantity 
when we set the cost to 10. 
But it's actually going to be 10, here is why : 

Inside _compute_quantities_dict, because we're 
asking for a quantity in the past, the computation is 
current quantity - quantities that went in between 
the date in the past and now + quantities that went 
out between the date in the past and now. 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/product.py#L255
So we should have : 100 - 100 (moves_in_res_past) + 0 
(moves_out_res_past) = 0
because we have 100 now and between the date 
we're asking for (the time of the manual value) and 
now there is one move in (when we set a quantity of 100) 
and no move out.

But moves_out_res_past will actually be 10 for our product
instead of 0. 
That's because in the read_group, our internal move 
will be considered as a move out and be taken into account 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60cf607d7148ebe389cc8513aa3b82e156cd4400/addons/stock/models/product.py#L233-L234

That's because: 
When we called _run_average_batch from 
_compute_value, we called it on 'products_to_value', 
which is based on 'products', which was computed 
calling with_valuation_context() 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60cf607d7148ebe389cc8513aa3b82e156cd4400/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L206
which passes the valued internal location in the context
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60cf607d7148ebe389cc8513aa3b82e156cd4400/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L366-L370
As wh2 is not internal (it's a view) it's not included in the locations 
from the context.
strict is also set to True

Therefore at the beginning of compute_quantities_dict, 
when we call _get_domain_location to compute 
domain_move_out_loc (on which domain_move_out_done 
will be based),
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60cf607d7148ebe389cc8513aa3b82e156cd4400/addons/stock/models/product.py#L165
inside _get_domain_location, because a location is 
given in the context that's the one we're going to use. 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60cf607d7148ebe389cc8513aa3b82e156cd4400/addons/stock/models/product.py#L365
and because strict is in the context, dest_location_domain_out
will be "location_dest_id not in [the list of valued location 
which does not include wh2]".
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7e95d32d669a7ee7c50b5e665697cb577be0af93/addons/stock/models/product.py#L402-L405
And back in compute_quantities_dict(), 
domain_move_out_loc will be "location_id in [the list 
of valued location] and location_dest_id not in 
[the list of valued location]".
Our internal move will therefore be considered 
as an out move and taken into account in the computation
mentioned above.

Which explains why quantity will be 10 inside 
run_average_batch and why the computation 
of total_value is wrong

**fix:**
in 19.0 the fix is in the xml to take less risk 
with regards to stable policy, however starting 
from 19.1 the fix will be in python
opw-6321636

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275384
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273388

Version:
---------
- 19.0+

Steps to Reproduce:
-----------------------
1. Install sale_management, purchase, stock modules.
2. Create a storable product with Tracking: By Lot,
3. Create two Purchase Orders, each for 10 units.
   Receive PO-1 → 10 units with tagged as lot-1
   Receive PO-2 → 10 units with tagged as lot-2
4. Create two Sale Orders:
   SO-1 → deliver 2 units from lot-1 (validate)
   SO-2 → deliver 4 units from lot-2 (validate)
5. Open Inventory > Reporting > Stock,
   click "Total Value", then check the "Remaining Quantity" column

Issue:
-------
Observed : remaining_qty = 10 for lot-2 receipt, 4 for lot-1 receipt
Expected : remaining_qty = 8 for lot-1 receipt (10−2), 6 for lot-2 receipt (10−4)

Cause:
--------
When the "Remaining Quantity" column is computed, the following call
chain executes:

  stock.move._compute_remaining_qty()
    → calls product.product._get_remaining_moves()
        → calls product._run_fifo_get_stack()   ← HERE is the problem

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4d079cc5a9c47672cf1a6747bb073e8e74f7350/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L372

`_get_remaining_moves` calls `_run_fifo_get_stack()` with NO lot
argument. Inside `_run_fifo_get_stack`, because no lot is given, it
computes the stack size from the TOTAL product qty across all lots:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4d079cc5a9c47672cf1a6747bb073e8e74f7350/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L583

  fifo_stack_size = 14   (10 received lot-1 + 10 received lot-2
                          − 2 delivered lot-1 − 4 delivered lot-2)

It then builds a domain to find incoming moves with NO lot filter:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4d079cc5a9c47672cf1a6747bb073e8e74f7350/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L607

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4d079cc5a9c47672cf1a6747bb073e8e74f7350/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L614-L618

  ```Domain: [('is_in', '=', True), ('product_id', '=', X)]
  ↳ returns both receipts ordered:
      [lot-2 receipt (10 qty), lot-1 receipt (10 qty)]

then walks this list consuming `fifo_stack_size = 14`:
So it take: [move_lot1_receipt(10)]  First Lot

remaining_qty_on_first = min(10, 14) = 10 
after consuming fifo_stack_size →  14−10=4 left → move_lot1 gets 4
```
So back in `_get_remaining_moves`:

  qty_by_move = {
      lot-2 receipt → 10,   ← wrong (should be 6)
      lot-1 receipt →  4,   ← wrong (should be 8)
  }

- The root cause: `_run_fifo_get_stack` is designed for products that
have one shared FIFO stack. For lot-valuated products, each lot is an
independent inventory layer. Running a single combined stack mixes both
lots together, so the deductions (2 from lot-1, 4 from lot-2) are not
attributed to the correct receipt moves — the algorithm just consumes
from the oldest receipts first with no awareness of which lot was
actually delivered.

Fix:
-----
`_run_fifo_get_stack` already accepts a `lot=` argument that:
- sets `fifo_stack_size = lot.product_qty` (correct per-lot qty)
- adds `('move_line_ids.lot_id', 'in', lot.id)` to the domain
  so only the receipts that touched that specific lot are returned
The only missing piece was calling it per lot instead of once globally.

- With the fix, the stack for each lot is built correctly:
  lot-1: fifo_stack_size = 8 → lot-1 receipt remaining_qty = 8  ✓
  lot-2: fifo_stack_size = 6 → lot-2 receipt remaining_qty = 6  ✓

---

opw-6311341

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272411

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable Multi-Steps route
- Unarchive the MTO route and set its production rule in MTSO
- Create 3 products: P1, P2 and COMP all using the MTO route
- Create 2 BOM's, one for P1 and one for P2: 1 X COMP
- Put 2 units of COMP in stock and add an empty bom (to trigger a child MO creation in case the MTSO route is triggered)
- Create and confirm a sale order for: 1 x P1 and 1 X P2
#### > An MO was generated for both product but P2 also generated a child MO for 1 unit of COMP instead of using the available unit

Cause of the issue:

The issue happens in the `_prepare_procurement_qty` which incorrectly assess that 1 unit of COMP will be required. The issue has been introduced by commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/e30fb722c00805e7226d2ee9e3e587b3c2204840 which introduced a dictionary to keep track of units of  products that will be used by the confirmation process of other concurrent mtso moves: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1683-L1689 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1712-L1715 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1810-L1814 
While by design this propagates the information used by other mtso moves in a common `_action_confirm` stack, the issue that we encounter is that this quantity is only relevant to be substracted to the free_qty when the unit is not yet reserved and hence already accounted negatively in `free_qty`. However, in the present case, confirming the receipt of P1 and P2 will confirm both moves simultaneously, triggering a common `_run_manufacture` to generate both an MO for P1 and for P2. At this point the dictionary `consumed_from_stock_dict` is shared in both MO's confirmation but since the MO's are confirmed sequentially rather than in batch:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71f0715bd5e29e976a1e8bfa7c4fa6e04735ebd7/addons/mrp/models/stock_rule.py#L122-L125
The confirmation of the MO of P1 will update the `consumed_from_stock_dict` for 1 unit of COMP and will also reserve 1 unit of COMP before the MO of P2 is confirmed (and calls the `_prepare_procurement_qty`) to determine how many units of COMP are till available. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that 1 - 1 = 0 units are still available to fulfill the demand of P2.

opw-6370298

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275539

Before this commit:
- When importing a **UBL** or **Factur-X (CII)** invoice, Odoo determines whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note based on the `TaxExclusiveAmount (UBL)` /` TaxBasisTotalAmount (Factur-X)`.
- In some rare cases, a valid invoice can contain a negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` while still having a positive `TaxInclusiveAmount` / `GrandTotalAmount`. 
- In such situations, Odoo incorrectly imports the document as a credit note.

Technical reason:
- The method `_get_import_document_amount_sign()` uses `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount `to determine whether the imported document is an invoice or a refund.

After this commit:
- **UBL** now uses `TaxInclusiveAmount` instead of `TaxExclusiveAmount`, and **Factur-X** now uses `GrandTotalAmount `instead of `TaxBasisTotalAmount` to determine whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note.
- Prevent valid invoices with negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` from being incorrectly converted into credit notes.

Task-6321262

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276307
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271829

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a promotions program with a rule granting 1 point per currency unit spent (minimum 2 items and 50.00 spent) and a reward "10% discount on the cheapest product" for 1 point
- Open a PoS session and add 2 products to trigger the program
- Keep adding products to the order

Issue:
A new "10% on the cheapest product" line is added for every product added. In eCommerce and Sales the discount is only applied once.

Cause:
The rule grants far more points than the reward costs, so the reward remains claimable after being applied. The auto-claim loop of `updateRewards` therefore re-applies it on every order change, stacking one discount line per change. The already-applied check in `getClaimableRewards` only covered 'coupons' programs, while `_get_claimable_rewards` in sale_loyalty also skips discount rewards already present on the order lines.

Solution:
When auto-claiming, skip discount rewards that are already applied on the order, unless they belong to a payment program (ewallet, gift card). The reward can still be claimed manually several times through the Reward button by spending more points.

opw-6380421

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276300

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `mrp` and `sale_management` modules
- Enable Units of Measure from settings
- Create a storable product configured as a Kit:
  - Set UoM to Units
  - Add component and it's UoM in Kg in Product form.
- Create and confirm a Sales Order with the kit product
- Validate the generated delivery order
- Print the delivery slip

Issue:
------
The delivery slip correctly displays component quantities in Kg,
but also shows an additional converted quantity in Units (e.g., 1000 Units),
which is incorrect and misleading.

Cause:
------
During sale order confirmation, the following flow is executed:
`action_confirm → _action_confirm → _action_launch_stock_rule → _prepare_procurement_values`

In `_prepare_procurement_values`, the `packaging_uom_id` is set from the
sale order line UoM (Units) and propagated to the generated stock move:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/647febbf46160c000bf11af8325cc80d0916eb67/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L296

When the delivery (picking) is created, kit components generate stock moves where:
- `product_uom` is defined in the component’s UoM (e.g., Kg)
- `packaging_uom_id` remains in Units (inherited from the sale order line)

While generating the delivery slip, `_get_aggregated_product_quantities`
computes `packaging_quantity` using `packaging_uom_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/647febbf46160c000bf11af8325cc80d0916eb67/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L888

In Mrp this calls the template:
`stock_report_delivery_aggregated_move_lines`
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/647febbf46160c000bf11af8325cc80d0916eb67/addons/mrp/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L60


In this template, a condition renders packaging quantities when
`packaging_uom_id` differs from `product_uom`. As a result, quantities are
converted from the component UoM (Kg) into the packaging UoM (Units).

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/647febbf46160c000bf11af8325cc80d0916eb67/addons/stock/report/report_deliveryslip.xml#L261

For kit components, this conversion is not meaningful and leads to incorrect
values (e.g., Kg → Units resulting in 1000 Units), causing misleading output
in the delivery slip.

Fix:
----

Add a `_compute_packaging_uom_id` override in `sale_mrp` and
`purchase_mrp` that resets `packaging_uom_id` back to
the component's own `product_uom` whenever the move originates from a
phantom BoM line, without touching `sale_line_id`/`purchase_line_id`
themselves.

<details>
  <summary>Click here to see the results:</summary>

  <p><strong>Before:</strong></p>
  <div class="image-row">
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5d8b2154-d794-4ce4-90a6-1a0aeaca8604" />
  </div>

  <p><strong>After:</strong></p>
  <div class="image-row">
    <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/79d708de-19e3-452d-9033-322a297c38e9" />
  </div>
</details>

---

opw-6136928

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262705

When sending a batch of invoice, we first generate an unique PDF file regrouping every invoice.
When at least one invoice needs more than one page to be rendered entirely, the number of pages will
be greater than the number of invoices.

In this case, we use <hX> tags to split invoices:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5ba945cdba6be3ff8838e56784ade16c6200de84/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_actions_report.py#L916-L923

This tag is added for PDF files, using the invoice's title:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5ba945cdba6be3ff8838e56784ade16c6200de84/addons/web/views/report_templates.xml#L627

In some localization modules, this title shouldn't be displayed and it is removed. Example for Chile:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5ba945cdba6be3ff8838e56784ade16c6200de84/addons/l10n_cl/views/report_invoice.xml#L149

In this case, no `<h3>` tag will be added and an error is raised as we cannot separate invoices.

We propose to add an empty `<h3>` tag if the
document title is not defined.

opw-6281187

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269100

For a logged-in user, some form fields are automatically prefilled from
their profile, such as a "Phone" field with their phone number.

**Issue:**
The prefill configuration is always preserved when we change options of
a field. While this is correct when updating few options, but it also
happens after the field is repurposed, causing it to inherit a prefill
value intended for a different field.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Edit the /contactus page's form.
- Change the "Name" field's type to a "URL" or "CC" field.
- Save the changes.
- The "URL/CC" field is prefilled with the user's name.

A field is considered repurposed when:
- its type is changed (e.g. from "Phone" to "URL");
- a custom field is converted into an existing field.

**Fix:**
This commit preserves the prefill only when the field keeps the same
name and type. Otherwise, it clears the stale prefill so repurposed
fields no longer inherit incorrect values.

task-[5976747](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/974/tasks/5976747)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275812

### [FIX] web: fix mocked dates in tests

Dates are mocked in all unit tests by default; either to a default static
value, or to one defined in the test/suite. To do so, the `window.Date`
constructor is overridden to have the arguments auto-filled with the current
mock date paramters.

Before this commit, an additional offset was always added to the given
arguments to reflect:
- the time elapsed from the beginning of the test;
- any virtual offset added by a helper such as 'advanceTime'.

The issue is that the spec of the Date constructor wants that the returned date
object has to match all given arguments, and any omitted argument will be
defaulted to the current date/time. This was not the case in tests, as the
offset was always added, regardless of the given arguments.

With this commit: only the arguments that are NOT given and that have been
defaulted to current (mocked) date/time will be offset by the adequate value.
Furthermore: as these mocked parameters are meant to reflect UTC values, the
offset now also considers the *actual* browser offset to generate a local date
from the mock date parameters.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275391

Before this commit:
- When importing a **UBL** or **Factur-X (CII)** invoice, Odoo determines whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note based on the `TaxExclusiveAmount (UBL)` /` TaxBasisTotalAmount (Factur-X)`.
- In some rare cases, a valid invoice can contain a negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` while still having a positive `TaxInclusiveAmount` / `GrandTotalAmount`. 
- In such situations, Odoo incorrectly imports the document as a credit note.

Technical reason:
- The method `_get_import_document_amount_sign()` uses `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount `to determine whether the imported document is an invoice or a refund.

After this commit:
- **UBL** now uses `TaxInclusiveAmount` instead of `TaxExclusiveAmount`, and **Factur-X** now uses `GrandTotalAmount `instead of `TaxBasisTotalAmount` to determine whether the document should be imported as an invoice or a credit note.
- Prevent valid invoices with negative `TaxExclusiveAmount` / `TaxBasisTotalAmount` from being incorrectly converted into credit notes.

Task-6321262

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275994
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271829

Issue:
- After confirming a sale order with a reward applied (e.g. an ewallet reward), unlocking it, and editing it so the reward line's cost changes (e.g. adding a product and re-claiming the reward), the coupon's point balance updates correctly.
- However, the corresponding loyalty.history record's used value is never refreshed, so it keeps showing the old cost instead of the new one.

Steps to reproduce:
- Enable Loyalty and Lock Confirmed Sales in Sales settings.
- Create an ewallet type loyalty.program and generate an ewallet for a partner with e.g. 1000 points.
- Create a sale order for that partner, add a product worth 100, and claim the ewallet reward (reward line created with points_cost = 100).
- Confirm the order. loyalty.history shows used = 100 (correct), card balance shows 900 (correct).
- Unlock the order, add a second product worth 100, and claim the reward again (same reward line updates to points_cost = 200).
- Lock the order again.
- Check the loyalty.card: balance is correctly 800.
- Check loyalty.history for that order: used still shows 100 instead of 200.

Fix:
- Updated _update_loyalty_history() in sale_order.py to create a new history line if none exists 
  for the given card and order combination.
- Updated write() in sale_order_line.py to correctly sync history lines when a reward line is 
  modified on a confirmed order, handling both same-coupon updates via delta and coupon 
  changes by subtracting the old coupon cost and adding the new one separately.
- Added test_loyalty_history_created_on_post_confirm_reward to verify that a history line is created 
  when a reward is claimed on a confirmed order where no history line existed before.
- Added test_loyalty_history_updated_on_points_cost_write to verify that history.used is updated by the 
  correct delta when points_cost changes on a reward line of a confirmed order.

Impact:
- Ensures a coupon's usage history stays accurate after a confirmed order is unlocked and edited.
- Prevents the loyalty.history used field from silently going stale while the actual point balance is correct.
- Not scoped to ewallet specifically — since points_cost semantics are the same across program types, this also corrects the same class of staleness for other reward types (discount, gift_card, etc.) when a reward line's cost changes post-confirmation.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273688

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Create a Sales Order.
2. Create a 50% down payment invoice.
3. Create a credit note for the down payment invoice.
4. Reset the credit note to Draft and cancel it.
5. Create the final invoice from the Sales Order.

**Issue:**
The final invoice is generated for 100% of the order amount, acting as if the down payment invoice does not exist.

**Expected behavior:**
The final invoice should only include the remaining 50% of the order amount because a valid 50% down payment invoice still exists.

**Why this happens:**
- The `price_unit` on the Sales Order's down payment line is manually updated during `action_post()` based on the sum of posted invoices minus posted credit notes.
- When the credit note is posted, `price_unit` drops to 0. However, when that credit note is subsequently reset to draft and cancelled, it triggers `button_cancel()` which only refreshed the line's display name and failed to recalculate `price_unit`. As a result, `price_unit` remained at 0 even though the credit note was no longer active, causing the final invoice to deduct nothing.

opw-6373578

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275684

This PR introduces an improvement to the account and l10n_latam_check modules that allows for multiple liquidity lines (one per check) to be recorded in a single journal entry. Currently, a split journal entry is created for each liquidity line, which presents several disadvantages:
   - Incorrect computation of payment and invoice states
   - Simplified workflow: By using a single journal entry for all liquidity lines, the workflow is significantly simplified and accounting complexity is reduced.
   - First step towards a refactor: This improvement is a first step towards a broader refactor that will allow adapting the own check flow in payment registration without the need to create journal entries.

Changes made:
   - Enhanced _synchronize_to_moves() method: - Allows for the creation and update of multiple liquidity lines within a single journal entry. - Removes excess liquidity lines if _prepare_move_line_default_vals() returns fewer lines than currently exist. - Account type-based counterparty identification: Replaces the previous position-based identification with an approach based on account types. - The starting index for extra line values is now dynamic, determined by the number of liquidity lines

   - Removed _l10n_latam_check_split_move method:
       - This method is no longer necessary given the new implementation that supports multiple liquidity lines in a single journal entry.
   - Modified _prepare_move_line_default_vals() method: - Now returns one liquidity line for each registered own check, simplifying the generation of journal entries.
   - Preserved _l10n_latam_check_unlink_split_move() method:
       - Maintained for backward compatibility purposes, allowing payments containing split moves to be set to draft status.

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

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#179017

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------------
1. Install hr_timesheet and create a second company (e.g., Company B).
2. Create a global project (no company assigned) with timesheets enabled.
3. Share the project with edit access to a portal user belonging to Company A.4
4. Create a task, switch to Company B, and log a timesheet on the task.
5. Log in as the portal user and try to access the project.

Issue:
-------
An `Access to unauthorized or invalid companies exception` is raised,
preventing the portal user from accessing a project they are legitimately shared on.

Cause:
----------
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b7b3292b6a46c3dbc17aeee0183df0af318bf810/addons/project/controllers/portal.py#L159-L173 During `_prepare_project_sharing_session_info`, hr_timesheet overrides the company determination logic through `_get_project_sharing_company()`. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b7b3292b6a46c3dbc17aeee0183df0af318bf810/addons/hr_timesheet/controllers/project.py#L13-L18

For global projects, the company is derived from an existing timesheet if one exists. As a result, creating a timesheet in another company causes that company to be injected into the sharing session as the current company.

Since the portal user does not have access to that company, opening the project triggers an access error.

Solution:
----------
Remove the `_get_project_sharing_company()` override. The base implementation already falls back to the portal user's own company when the project has no company assigned, ensuring the sharing session only contains companies the portal user is allowed to access.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b7b3292b6a46c3dbc17aeee0183df0af318bf810/addons/project/controllers/portal.py#L141-L142 
This allows portal users from Company A to continue accessing global projects without errors.

opw-6253960



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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272161

For a logged-in user, some form fields are automatically prefilled from
their profile, such as a "Phone" field with their phone number.

**Issue:**
The prefill configuration is always preserved when we change options of
a field. While this is correct when updating few options, but it also
happens after the field is repurposed, causing it to inherit a prefill
value intended for a different field.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Edit the /contactus page's form.
- Change the "Name" field's type to a "URL" or "CC" field.
- Save the changes.
- The "URL/CC" field is prefilled with the user's name.

A field is considered repurposed when:
- its type is changed (e.g. from "Phone" to "URL");
- a custom field is converted into an existing field.

**Fix:**
This commit preserves the prefill only when the field keeps the same
name and type. Otherwise, it clears the stale prefill so repurposed
fields no longer inherit incorrect values.

task-[5976747](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/974/tasks/5976747)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275812

Before this commit, validating transfers of several companies at once could assign a lot of one company to the move lines of another one, because the search for existing lots used a variable left over from a previous loop (the last move line iterated) instead of the company of the group of lines being checked.

Steps to reproduce:
- in a multi-company database, create a product tracked by lots
- create a lot with the same name for that product in each company
- create one receipt per company with that lot name typed in the detailed operations, select both receipts in the Transfers list view and validate them together

The lines of one company are linked to the lot of the other company and the validation is blocked by "Incompatible companies on records". When the lot only exists in one of the companies, the search misses it and the validation fails on the lot uniqueness constraint while recreating a lot that already exists.

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

Before this commit, decreasing the quantity of a move whose move lines are expressed in another unit of measure removed the wrong quantity from the lines, because the two conversions between the move unit and the line unit converted a value to its own unit, hence did nothing.

Steps to reproduce:
- create a product in Units with available stock
- create a delivery for 2 Dozen of it and mark it as todo
- in the detailed operations, change the unit of the move line to Units (24)
- lower the move quantity from 2 to 1 Dozen

The move line ends up with 23 Units instead of 12: the decrease of 1 Dozen is applied as 1 Unit on the line and considered fully processed. The remaining 11 units stay reserved and counted on the transfer.

Convert the remaining decrease from the move unit to the line unit when taking it from a line, and the taken quantity back to the move unit when updating the remaining decrease.

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