Steps to reproduce:
- Set the user language to Dutch.
- Go to Accounting > Reporting > Annual Statements.
- Generate the XBRL export for a report other than the "company,
  abridged" (acon) balance sheet/P&L combination, e.g. an association
  (asso_a/asso_f) or "company, full"/"company, capital" report.
- Open the file: the `<met:bln1>` boolean facts are exported as
  "onwaar" instead of "false", which is not a valid XBRL boolean
  lexical value and gets rejected by the NBB validator.

Cause of the issue:
QWeb templates translate static text nodes by default. The base
module ships a generic `msgid "false" -> msgstr "onwaar"` translation,
used elsewhere in the UI, which silently hijacks the literal
"false"/"true" and unit tokens ("iso4217:EUR", "pure") in the XBRL
data templates whenever the file is generated in Dutch.

Solution:
Add `t-translation="off"` on the `<met:bln1>` boolean facts and the
`<measure>` unit tokens in the 5 remaining XBRL templates,
so these fixed-vocabulary XBRL values are never subject to translation

opw-6395785

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124945

To reproduce the issue:

1) Initialize a company in Belgium, create the tax returns 2) Submit the VAT return from January
3) Open the lock date wizard. The tax lock date is January 31st. 4) Add a lock date exception removing the tax lock date just for you, for 5 min. 5) Reset January's return
6) Reopen the lock date wizard.
    ====> Your exception is still there, but the tax lock date for everyone has been reset to December 31st.

This is plain wrong. Resetting a return should not automatically reopen the period for everyone. Lock dates exceptions/modifications are anyway required to reset the return ; they should pilot the whole flow. Nothing being magically hidden from the user means there can't be someone else mistakenly encoding something into the reopened period.

Another fix was required to make this one work: setting the tax lock date before submitting the return should work. In bigger environments, users might want to do that as a first step to reduce the number of people encoding data before actually doing the submission of the return. Therefore, the case where the tax lock date is already set at the date_to of the return when submitting it was supposed to be already supported, and allow the creation of the closing entry for that return, despite it being on the tax lock date. The test ensuring this was however badly written, and the feature didn't work: the closing was created at a later date than the lock date automatically, due to the Bills' Algorithm.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124872
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124811

Steps to reproduce
---
1. Enable Packages and turn on "Move Entire Packages" on the delivery operation type.
2. Create a storable product P and add 2 units in different package in stock: 1 in PACK001, 1 in PACK002 
3. In the Barcode app > Operations > Delivery > New
4. Scan a first package PACK001, then a second different package PACK002
5. Scan the first package PACK001 again.

Issue
---
Re-scanning an already scanned package is meant to be rejected with a "This package is already scanned." warning, but the rejection stops working as soon as a second package is present in the transfer, so the package content gets added a second time and, once validated, the source quant goes negative (the package ends up holding a negative and a positive quant of the same product).

Commit 23613c63947 added a canPackSomeLines flag that is set to true for every package line that is not the scanned one, so any other package in the transfer makes the alreadyDonePackId && !canPackSomeLines guard false and silently skips the warning. The scanned package already exposes whether it had something left to pack through scannedPackages, so gating the warning on that flag instead keeps the check working regardless of how many other packages are in the transfer.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3cc1a162e61662814b0e52c0c720831952d208a8/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L1976-L2006

opw-6279105

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121755

`pos_amount_unsettled` is a stored computed field defined as the invoice's residual minus the settle lines belonging to sessions that are not yet closed. Its compute method filters the lines on `order_id.session_id.state`, but that state is not in the compute dependencies.

When closing a session holding a settle order, `_validate_session()` first reconciles the settle payment with the invoice (which lowers `amount_residual_signed` and flags the field for recomputation) and only then writes `state = 'closed'` on the session. If the pending recomputation is executed in that window (any flush of `account.move` does it: recomputing the field for any other flagged record drags the whole queue along), the settle line is deducted from the already reconciled residual, i.e. counted twice, and the field is stored as `residual - settled` instead of `residual`. Since the session state is not a dependency, writing `state = 'closed'` does not flag the field again and the wrong value is never corrected.

The partner's `invoices_amount_due` then goes negative, which hides the "Settle invoices" option in the POS partner list and inflates the "Settle due amount" proposal
(`remainingDue = total_due - pos_orders_amount_due - invoices_amount_due`): a customer owing e.g. 500 is proposed, and charged, 700.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Post a customer invoice of 1000.
2. In the POS, select the customer > Settle invoices, pick the invoice, set the amount to 700 and pay in cash.
3. Close the session. The issue only occurs when the pending recomputation runs during the closing, which depends on the other operations performed by it (not deterministic in real usage; the regression test forces it with a flush after the reconciliation).
4. The invoice's "Amount To Pay In POS" shows -400 instead of 300 and the POS proposes to settle 700 instead of 300.

Add the session state to the compute dependencies so that the field is recomputed once the session is closed, yielding the correct amount regardless of any intermediate recomputation.

opw-6375095

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123783

To reproduce the issue:

1) Create a company in Belgium
2) Instantiate its returns and review, submit and pay one of the VAT returns 3) Change the states_worklfow of the VAT return so that it only accepts "review" and "submit" stages, not "paid" anymore 4) Go to the list of returns, remove the TODO filter => traceback

The problem is here that the existing returns don't recompute their state when the workflow of the type is modified. In some cases, this is fine, but it others, it's annoying. In our example, the terminal state changed, so all the returns in that terminal stage should change their state to the new terminal one. "paid" is not an accepted value anymore, it should become "submitted".

Moreover, when the workflow is changed, the selection field actually containing the state must also change. As it is, it seems to work because "state" of account.return is stored, but the value it's based on (the workflow field) won't be consistent with it. It's not annoying now, but those inconsistencies could become a big source of trouble in the future (we know that from experience ... I'm looking at you, version 8 ! è-é).

This issue typically happens at upgrade. We had cases in FR and AE already. We solve that by a generic override of the write to sort things out when such change needs to happen. An upgrade PR will also be done to adapt the script so that we eventually solve the inconsistencies on dbs that have already migrated to 19.0.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124144

## Problem
When generating accrual entries for multiple sale orders, the stock variation lines would all show the same order name, even if the line belonged to a different sale order. This is caused by the `order` variable being reused from a previous loop.

## Solution
We will pull the order name directly from the order line in the current iteration.

## Steps to reproduce (Runbot v19)
1. Create a product with AVCO perpetual valuation
2. Make sure all accounts are configured properly (Income, Expense, Stock, and stock variation accounts)
3. Add units to the stock (it can be with an adjustment, as long as the product has a cost already set)
4. Create 2 separate sales orders for this product
5. Deliver both of the sales orders, do not invoice them
6. Now go to the Accounting App Review>Invoices to be issued
7. Select the 2 invoices that were created.

The Revenue accrual lines are correct, with each SO being referenced, but on the Stock variation lines, only the last SO selected will appear.

opw-6361032

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277058

# Step to reproduce
- Install eCommerce
- Activate dev mode with tests assets (important!)
- Go to the website & add a Countdow in the footer
- Add a new product from the website system tray
- Put any name & Save
- Go into Edit mode
- In the Style tab, (un)toggle "Tax Indication" (may need to do it multiple times)

> Note that the issue is quite inconsistent to reproduce
# Issue
A traceback is shown

# Cause
The only thing I'm sure of is that the error is caused by this code :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8759429547e42e9f63b15a7c80475be46ef437e2/addons/website/static/tests/tour_utils/lifecycle_dep_interaction.js#L18-L20

And that it is linked to `browser.localStorage`. I suspect it is due to some weird localStorage and
WysiwygAdapter interaction :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d6a08b67a948f569a1ca893b6337ce50b4ef9f07/addons/website/static/tests/tours/widget_lifecycle.js#L53-L60

But I can't be sure because debugging tools do not seem to be working. See the inverstigation comment
in the associated PR for more information.

# Proposed Solution
Since this code is only used for this test :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/96a0a9a0332ae460973b6f01b461a0f7e3e2f7fa/addons/website/static/tests/tours/interaction_lifecycle.js#L14-L15

And the test directly parses from the `window.localStorage` :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/96a0a9a0332ae460973b6f01b461a0f7e3e2f7fa/addons/website/static/tests/tours/interaction_lifecycle.js#L50

We can use `window.localStorage` instead of `browser.localStorage`  as it fixes the issue

opw-6246850

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272736

Issue :-

Steps to Reproducet: SaaS 19.3
- Create a new database Install the Sale module.
- Create a product set some On Hand quantity for that product (via Inventory adjustment).
- Create a Quotation using that product.
- Confirm the quotation (turning it into a Sales Order).
- Open the Forecasted Report for that product.

The Reserve / Unreserve button in the Forecasted Report not render.
<img width="1811" height="323" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4093bddb-f332-4b84-a482-a6604ebcb318" />

Regression from the OWL3 rendering context migration ("[REF] stock,*: run rendering context migration script"), which rewrote the template call `displayReserve(line)` into `this.displayReserve(line)`. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/df40bc9e261a62c045e7e6150a60663a582e7dae and it comes in 19.2 onwards version.

The previous bare call compiled to `ctx['displayReserve'](...)`, so the method executed with `this` bound to that render context, which does own `line` and `line_index`. The lookups resolved by accident, not by design. as far as i have known.

With the explicit [`this.`](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/df40bc9e261a62c045e7e6150a60663a582e7dae#diff-c556e01f9a3ebdb27bb6599d12b74c7bb0a433177cc0e126365cb763a874d9f4R81) form required by OWL3, `this` is correctly the component instance, so `this.line` and `this.line_index` are undefined:

```py
  - `this.line_index - 1 >= 0`    -> NaN >= 0 -> false, the block is
                                     skipped and `splittedLine` stays true
  - `this.lines[this.line_index]` -> undefined
  - `.includes(undefined)`        -> false, so `isOnHand()` is false
```
<img width="1404" height="786" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6d2cb88b-a695-4388-9b5e-3eac266f1877" />

`displayReserve()` therefore always returns a falsy value and the `t-if` never renders the button. `isOnHand(line)`, which the template also calls directly to render the reservable quantity, is broken for the same reason.

Root cause: 
loop variables produced by `t-foreach`/`t-as` live only on the template render context and must never be read off `this` in a component method. The previous code depended on OWL2 resolving a bare template call against that context, which OWL3 no longer does.

``` with the displayReserve(line) ```
<img width="1185" height="599" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ed79f6db-f95c-437f-baf8-f65391df14e7" />

```with the this.displayReserve(line)```
<img width="1020" height="641" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/61103db5-7e0a-4362-9dd4-c2f47db2bd97" />

Fix: 
derive the values from the `line` argument the methods already receive, instead of reading them off `this`.
```py
  - `displayReserve()`: `const line_index = this.lines.indexOf(line)`, and
    use the `line` argument in place of `this.line`
  - `isOnHand()` / `isReconciled()`: test against `line` directly, since
    `this.lines[line_index] === line` inside the loop
```
The template is unchanged: the OWL3-compliant `this.displayReserve(line)` call stays as the migration left it, and no method signature changes.

``` with the current fix```
<img width="1100" height="480" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/39147abb-ba5e-42ae-84f5-3d7cbadda1e1" />

<img width="1879" height="304" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fafd3d6a-7591-4dbd-a85c-8fb9de541dd8" />


OPW:- 6363290


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

Steps to reproduce:
- Install `project`, open a project and switch to the Gantt view
- Start dragging a task while holding Ctrl (copy mode), then switch browser tab with Ctrl+Tab (or Ctrl+Shift+Tab, Ctrl+PgUp/PgDn)
- Come back to the Gantt tab and drop the task without holding Ctrl

Issue:
The task is duplicated instead of rescheduled.

Cause:
The copy/reschedule behavior is tracked through window keydown/keyup listeners on the Control key. While the document is hidden, the keyup for Control is never received, so the drag sequence resumes with a stale "Ctrl pressed" state and the drop is treated as a copy.

Fix:
Keyboard and pointer states cannot be reliably tracked while the document is hidden, so cancel any ongoing drag sequence from `makeDraggableHook` as soon as the tab is no longer visible (through the `visibilitychange` event). This applies to every drag and drop instance built on the hook builder.

opw-6298440

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277014
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276859

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**
----------------------------------------------
On mobile devices, the meeting view had two UI issues affecting the call
experience.
The call permission dialog could display an unwanted focus outline around
its content because the dialog body was focused on touch devices.
Additionally, meeting action buttons could be partially hidden,
especially in portrait mode, as the meeting view could extend beyond the
visible viewport height.

**Current behavior before PR:**
----------------------------------------------
- Opening the call permission dialog on mobile could show an unwanted
  focus outline around the dialog content
- Meeting action buttons could be partially hidden on mobile devices
- In portrait mode, the footer could overflow below the visible viewport


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
----------------------------------------------
- Call permission dialog opens on mobile without showing the unwanted
focus outline on main body.
- Meeting action buttons remain fully visible on mobile devices


Task-6232825

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266620

Before this commit, the journal and the memo of a payment linked to a company-paid expense report could be modified although such payments must be kept consistent with their expense report: a missing comma in the set of protected fields merged 'journal_id' and 'ref' into a single meaningless entry. The memo was also left editable because the set still referred to 'ref', which was renamed to 'memo'.

Steps to reproduce:
- submit, approve and post an expense paid by company
- open the payment created for the expense report
- edit the memo or the journal and save, then try to edit the date

Editing the date is refused with "You cannot do this modification since the payment is linked to an expense report", while the memo and journal changes are silently accepted.

Solution:
Restore the missing comma and protect the renamed memo field.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277737
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277423

### Contains the following commits:

https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/2059bd0f1d [REL] 19.3.13 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/cc83aaa9a2 [FIX] autofill: hide autofill handler when selection is hidden [Task: 6317808](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6317808)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/81c80ee9c7 [FIX] HeaderVisibility: fix `getNextVisibleCellPosition` getter [Task: 6340589](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6340589)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/60a18e436c [FIX] edition: do not change edition if not editing [Task: 6340589](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6340589)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/53822161e2 [FIX] table computed style: fix render table [Task: 6396322](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6396322)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/79cc137d8a [FIX] collaborative: add sheetId as argument to `getClientsToDisplay` [Task: 6408720](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6408720)

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>

# How to reproduce
- Enable Cloudflare Turnstile in Settings > Integrations
- Add a CF Site Key & a CF Secret Key. e.g. :
	- `1x00000000000000000000AA`
	- `1x0000000000000000000000000000000AA` 
(See : https://developers.cloudflare.com/turnstile/troubleshooting/testing/)
- Go to a Website page with a form
- Add `?cf=show` to the URL
- Open the browser console
- Search the dom for an element with s_turnstile_container
- Look for the `data-appearance` attribute

# The issue
`data-appearance` is set to `interaction-only` but should be `always` according to :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1e73172b51cd673c3414187af4f98304921ed7b3/addons/website_cf_turnstile/static/src/interactions/turnstile.js#L8-L12

# Cause
`appearance` is misspelled in the template :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1e73172b51cd673c3414187af4f98304921ed7b3/addons/website_cf_turnstile/static/src/interactions/turnstile.xml#L7

Documentation on the Appearance modes for Turnstile : https://developers.cloudflare.com/turnstile/get-started/client-side-rendering/widget-configurations/#appearance-modes

opw-6359977

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275077

### Issue before this commit:
Sending a TicketBAI invoice to a customer with a Spanish address and a VAT number starting with 'N' (Non-resident entity) resulted in a rejection with error B4_2000027. The XML incorrectly generated the national <DesgloseFactura> tag instead of the required <DesgloseTipoOperacion> tag.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting, l10n_es and l10n_es_edi_tbai
2. Change name to ES Company into “NOMBRE APELLIDOUNO APELLIDODOS” (this is to make sure the certificate for Ticketbai works)
3. Go to Settings → Spain Localization → set Tax Agency for = Bizkaia
4. Change VAT number for customer Mulhacén Digital S.L. into N0011452J (must be a foreign entity ID)
5. Go to Settings > Technical > System Parameters and set the parameter 'l10n_es_edi_tbai.epigrafe' to 165360
6. Create a new invoice for that client and try to send it to TicketBAI
7. Error:  B4_1000002: Todos los registros incluidos en la petición son incorrectos. B4_2000027: La factura contiene un Tipo de desglose incorrecto. Ha de ser a nivel de operación cuando la factura es completa y, además, existe destinatario extranjero (tipo IDOtro o que sea NIF que empiece por N) o la Clave de IVA es 02.

### Cause of the issue:
The _l10n_es_is_foreign() method evaluated these customers as domestic because their country was set to Spain and their VAT did not start with "ESN". It failed to recognize a standalone "N" prefix as a valid foreign identifier.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/75ae45861e2f417aa2b90bdb2b2869718e091c09/addons/l10n_es/models/res_partner.py#L7-L10


### Reason to introduce the fix:
Adding the 'N' prefix to the _l10n_es_is_foreign() check ensures the system correctly treats these entities as foreign for tax purposes. This generates the correct XML structure automatically, without forcing users to unnaturally prepend "ES" to a legally valid NIF.

opw-6326359

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276966
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275231

# How to reproduce
- In Settings, enable Variants & Product Reference Price
- Create a published Product with a Sales Price
- Add 2 variants to the Product
- In the product's variant list, select the first one & set Base Unit Count to 0,
- Set the second variant's Base Unit Count to a value > 0
- Go to the Product's page
- Select the second variant

# The issue
The Reference Price is not displayed for the second variant, even though it should since it has a Base Unit Count > 0. Refreshing the page while being on the second variant will prevent the bug from happening.

# Cause
When loading the product's info, we call `_onChangeCombination`. This method is responsible for, among other things, updating the reference price and hiding it if Base Unit Count  = 0 :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/68f258e99f42693131a5309b3606c3b95f93d824/addons/website_sale/static/src/js/variant_mixin.js#L277-L289

To do that, it will search for an html element with the `.o_base_unit_price` css class. If it does not find it, the reference price will not be updated. The issue is that this element is behind a condition in the template :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/68f258e99f42693131a5309b3606c3b95f93d824/addons/website_sale/views/templates.xml#L2083

When the first time the template is loaded, if
`combination_info.get('base_unit_price')` is False, then the Reference Price will never be added to the view and will never be found by `_onChangeCombination`.

Since our first variant has Base Unit Count = 0, then `base_unit_price` will equal 0, so `combination_info.get('base_unit_price')` will be evaluated to false.

opw-6367289

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276317
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274722