Daily updates from Odoo
Monday, July 20, 2026
4 changes · 18.0
Resolved issues and error corrections
Issue: In a multi-company environment, when an attachment is uploaded in the chatter, the resulting `ir.attachment` record incorrectly sets the company_id to the current user's default company. This occurs regardless of the active company or the company associated with the record the attachment is linked to. Steps to reproduce: In a multi-company setup, activate only Company B. Open any chatter and attach a file. Navigate to Settings > Technical > Data Structure > Attachments. Current b
Original PR description
Issue: In a multi-company environment, when an attachment is uploaded in the chatter, the resulting `ir.attachment` record incorrectly sets the company_id to the current user's default company. This…
Issue: In a multi-company environment, when an attachment is uploaded in the chatter, the resulting `ir.attachment` record incorrectly sets the company_id to the current user's default company. This occurs regardless of the active company or the company associated with the record the attachment is linked to. Steps to reproduce: In a multi-company setup, activate only Company B. Open any chatter and attach a file. Navigate to Settings > Technical > Data Structure > Attachments. Current behaviour: The created attachment has its company_id set to the user's default company, rather than the currently active company, or the company of the record, even when the record has a company_id field. This behavior introduces inconsistencies in data visibility, particularly when attachments appear to belong to a company different from the one associated with the related business record. Behaviour After Fix: If the related record (i.e., the model the attachment is linked to) contains a company_id field, its value will be used as the attachment's company_id otherwise, the attachment's company_id will be set to the currently active company's id. This logic ensures proper alignment between attachments and their related business records and also maintaining consistency in multi-company scenarios. task-4563173 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr
**Problem:** For an hour-based time off allocation, changing the employee's working schedule leaves the allocation duration (in days) stale, so the balance shown on the Time Off dashboard becomes wrong. **Steps to reproduce:** 1. Give an employee a working schedule of 8 hours/day. 2. Create an hour-based allocation (time off type with Request Unit = Hours) granting e.g. 8 hours (1 day). 3. Change the employee's working schedule to one with a different Hours per Day (e.g. 4 hours/day). 4.
Original PR description
**Problem:** For an hour-based time off allocation, changing the employee's working schedule leaves the allocation duration (in days) stale, so the balance shown on the Time Off dashboard becomes…
**Problem:** For an hour-based time off allocation, changing the employee's working schedule leaves the allocation duration (in days) stale, so the balance shown on the Time Off dashboard becomes wrong. **Steps to reproduce:** 1. Give an employee a working schedule of 8 hours/day. 2. Create an hour-based allocation (time off type with Request Unit = Hours) granting e.g. 8 hours (1 day). 3. Change the employee's working schedule to one with a different Hours per Day (e.g. 4 hours/day). 4. Check the allocation / the Time Off dashboard balance. **Current behavior:** number_of_days stays at its old value (1), so the balance is recomputed as 1 day x 4 hours = 4 hours instead of the 8 hours actually accrued. **Expected behavior:** The accrued hours stay constant; the duration in days follows the new schedule (8 hours / 4 hours-per-day = 2 days). **Cause of the issue:** `number_of_days` and `number_of_hours_display` compute from each other (`number_of_days = number_of_hours_display / hours_per_day` and `number_of_hours_display = number_of_days * hours_per_day`), forming a dependency cycle, and neither depends on the employee's working schedule. So a schedule change never recomputes either field. Adding the schedule to `_compute_number_of_days`' depends does not help: because of the cycle it recomputes `number_of_hours_display` from the stale `number_of_days` first, which silently destroys the accrued hours. **Fix:** When the employee's working schedule changes, the accrued hours are the quantity that must be preserved, so the duration is recomputed explicitly from the still-stored `number_of_hours_display` (setting `number_of_days` first, exactly as a manual `_compute_number_of_days()` does). Driving the order by hand is necessary because the cyclic compute graph cannot guarantee `number_of_days` is computed before `number_of_hours_display`. opw-6276242
### Contains the following commits: https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/ea26af9191 [REL] 18.0.75 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0) https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/5850ea078b [FIX] scorecardPanel: mismatch baseline/keyValue [Task: 6380393](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6380393) Co-authored-by: Florian Damhaut (flda) <flda@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Anthony Hendrickx (anhe) <anhe@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Alexis Lacroix (laa) <laa@odoo.com> Co-authored
Original PR description
### Contains the following commits: https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/ea26af9191 [REL] 18.0.75 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0) https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/5850ea078b [FIX] scorecardPanel: mismatch baseline/keyValue [Task: 6380393](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6380393) Co-authored-by: Florian Damhaut (flda) <flda@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Anthony Hendrickx (anhe) <anhe@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Alexis Lacroix (laa) <laa@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Lucas Lefèvre (lul) <lul@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Adrien Minne (adrm) <adrm@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Ronak Mukeshbhai Bharadiya (rmbh) <rmbh@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Dhrutik Patel (dhrp) <dhrp@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Rémi Rahir (rar) <rar@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Pierre Rousseau (pro) <pro@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Vincent Schippefilt (vsc) <vsc@odoo.com> Co-authored-by: Marceline Thomas (matho) <matho@odoo.com>
Reverse charge taxes (Inversione Contabile) should have the translated code ending with 'IC' (the acronym), not 'CI'. Suggested by partner: eLBati task-none Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276270
Original PR description
Reverse charge taxes (Inversione Contabile) should have the translated code ending with 'IC' (the acronym), not 'CI'. Suggested by partner: eLBati task-none Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276270