Daily updates from Odoo
Monday, July 27, 2026
18 changes · saas-18.3
Enhancements to existing features
With this update: - For UBL imports, bank details are also used to help identify the partner by matching the bank account number. The retrieval logic has also been improved: 1. If VAT exists in the XML: - If a partner found with no VAT then enrich that partner by filing VAT from xml - If a partner found with a different VAT than the one in the XML, then a new partner will be created Task [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/5485563) task-5485563
Original PR description
With this update: - For UBL imports, bank details are also used to help identify the partner by matching the bank account number. The retrieval logic has also been improved: 1. If VAT exists in the XML: - If a partner found with no VAT then enrich that partner by filing VAT from xml - If a partner found with a different VAT than the one in the XML, then a new partner will be created Task [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/5485563) task-5485563
Resolved issues and error corrections
This fix prevents an error from interrupting Swiss payroll ELM transmission when a related payroll rule has been archived. It helps payroll users continue processing employee monthly values reliably, even when old rules are no longer active.
Original PR description
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#103677
Rental orders using custom routes now correctly generate the expected return transfer, not just the delivery and purchase documents. This prevents missing return logistics when businesses rent products that are procured on demand.
Original PR description
### Steps to reproduce: - In the settings enable: Multi-Steps Routes and rental transfers - Unarchive the MTO route - Create a rental product P with a buy route and a set vendor - Create a rental…
### Steps to reproduce: - In the settings enable: Multi-Steps Routes and rental transfers - Unarchive the MTO route - Create a rental product P with a buy route and a set vendor - Create a rental order for 1 x P and set the the MTO route on the sol - Confirm the order #### > The delivery as well as the purchase for 1 unit of P was generated but the return was not. ### Cause of the issue: The procurement generated to handle both the delivery and the return rental picking are handled by the `_create_procurements`: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b0e48baaf99bdc4faefd2ffdd3bd5637fb548593/sale_stock_renting/models/sale_order_line.py#L353-L374 The `route_ids` set and used is the `mto_route` set on the sol: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f061503e26ac8c441d62d91947419119e48c47a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L415-L422 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/0f061503e26ac8c441d62d91947419119e48c47a/addons/sale_stock/models/sale_order_line.py#L282-L297 However, in the present case, the mto route does not contain any rule with a relevant `location_src_id` in the rental location so that the return will not be generated. opw-6361322 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124097
In commit 611ed3c430026d5fbeac0e565c379ae57a2a30bc `NOT IN ...` was converted to `!= ANY(...) but it should have been `!= ALL(...). task-None Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278445
Original PR description
In commit 611ed3c430026d5fbeac0e565c379ae57a2a30bc `NOT IN ...` was converted to `!= ANY(...) but it should have been `!= ALL(...). task-None Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278445
Steps to reproduce: ------------------- 1. Install sale_timesheet. 2. Create a service product with: - Invoicing Policy: Prepaid/Fixed Price - Create on Order: Project & Task 3. Create a sales order with this product. 4. Open the generated project > dashboard and verify that "To Invoice" shows $1. 5. Create a project update and observe that "To Invoice" also shows $1. 6. Return to the sales order, create and post the invoice. 7. Open the project dashboard again and verify that "T
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce: ------------------- 1. Install sale_timesheet. 2. Create a service product with: - Invoicing Policy: Prepaid/Fixed Price - Create on Order: Project & Task 3. Create a sales order…
Steps to reproduce: ------------------- 1. Install sale_timesheet. 2. Create a service product with: - Invoicing Policy: Prepaid/Fixed Price - Create on Order: Project & Task 3. Create a sales order with this product. 4. Open the generated project > dashboard and verify that "To Invoice" shows $1. 5. Create a project update and observe that "To Invoice" also shows $1. 6. Return to the sales order, create and post the invoice. 7. Open the project dashboard again and verify that "To Invoice" is now $0. 8. Create another project update. Issue: ------ The project update margin still displays $1 under "To Invoice" even though the sales order has already been fully invoiced. Cause: ------ The project update template displays the aggregated profitability totals (`profitability['total']['revenues']` and `profitability['total']['costs']`) instead of the dedicated `to_bill_to_invoice` and `billed_invoiced` values, causing stale "to invoice" amounts to persist after invoicing. Solution: --------- Use the `to_bill_to_invoice` and `billed_invoiced` values when rendering the project update profitability report. opw-6323869 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273605
`ref` already gives back a recordset if it found the reference. There is no need to research using the id on the same model, as `ref` calls `exists`, which already does the "same" query that's present here. Closes #137826 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276554
Original PR description
`ref` already gives back a recordset if it found the reference. There is no need to research using the id on the same model, as `ref` calls `exists`, which already does the "same" query that's present here. Closes #137826 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276554
When running `ŧest_free_reservation`, it could happen on very rare occasions that both moves would be created at a different second. In such cases, the test would fail. Since we want to test the case with *exact* same dates, we can't use `assertAlmostEqual` which is usually better for dates. Instead, we freeze the time for the duration of the creation / assignation. runbot-944453 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of:
Original PR description
When running `ŧest_free_reservation`, it could happen on very rare occasions that both moves would be created at a different second. In such cases, the test would fail. Since we want to test the case with *exact* same dates, we can't use `assertAlmostEqual` which is usually better for dates. Instead, we freeze the time for the duration of the creation / assignation. runbot-944453 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278103
Version: -------- - 18.0+ Steps to reproduce: ------------------- - Install `stock` module - Configure a multi-company environment with a `Main Company` and a `Secondary Company` - Go to the setting enable Lots & Serial Numbers and switch into `Secondary Company` - Create a warehouse for the Secondary Company - In the Secondary Company, create a lot-tracked storable product - Create and validate a delivery for that product - Open the Traceability Report - Print the report Is
Original PR description
Version: -------- - 18.0+ Steps to reproduce: ------------------- - Install `stock` module - Configure a multi-company environment with a `Main Company` and a `Secondary Company` - Go to the setting…
Version:
--------
- 18.0+
Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `stock` module
- Configure a multi-company environment with a `Main Company`
and a `Secondary Company`
- Go to the setting enable Lots & Serial Numbers and switch into
`Secondary Company`
- Create a warehouse for the Secondary Company
- In the Secondary Company, create a lot-tracked storable product
- Create and validate a delivery for that product
- Open the Traceability Report
- Print the report
Issue:
------
The report header always displays the Main Company, even though the
traceability report belongs entirely to the Secondary Company.
Cause:
------
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2d54db3ac0b6d807e580315e2633f3e2b10a700c/addons/stock/static/src/client_actions/stock_traceability_report_backend.xml#L9
Clicking Print calls onClickPrint(), which builds the PDF URL and
downloads it with download() (a plain XMLHttpRequest POST), landing on
the `type='http'` route `/stock/<output_format>/<report_name>`
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bd6b10c3f9ad8d93062b6b46490500edb8c9697/addons/stock/static/src/client_actions/stock_traceability_report_backend.js#L125-L134
That controller calls stock.traceability.report.get_pdf() without ever setting
`company_id` in the rendering context.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bd6b10c3f9ad8d93062b6b46490500edb8c9697/addons/stock/controllers/main.py#L23
Inside `get_pdf()`, the report header is rendered by passing an `rcontext`
dict to `web.internal_layout`.
That template resolves the company to display using the following priority:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bd6b10c3f9ad8d93062b6b46490500edb8c9697/addons/web/views/report_templates.xml#L805-L816
1. `company_id` — an explicit company record in the render context
2. `o.company_id` — the company of the document object `o`
3. `res_company` — the fallback, injected by `_render_template()` as
`self.env.company`
Because `get_pdf()` never sets `company_id` or `o` in `rcontext`, the
template always falls through to `res_company`.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3bd6b10c3f9ad8d93062b6b46490500edb8c9697/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_actions_report.py#L770
This is populated by `ir.actions.report._render_template()`
as `self.env.company`, which resolves to the first company in
the user's `allowed_company_ids` list — typically the main company
regardless of which company owns the lot,
picking, or stock moves being printed.
As a result, the report content belongs to the secondary company while the
header always shows the main company.
Fix:
----
Resolve the company from the record on which the traceability report is
opened (using `active_model` and `active_id`) and pass it explicitly as
`company_id` when rendering the report.
`web.internal_layout` already gives precedence to an explicit
`company_id` over the default `res_company`, ensuring the report header
always displays the company that owns the traced record.
When the record has no company set, the header falls back to
`res_company`. Since the print request is a raw `type='http'` download
that never receives the company switcher's context, `user.context`
(holding `allowed_company_ids`) is now forwarded in the download POST
and merged into the environment by the controller - as done in
`web/controllers/report.py` - so the fallback resolves to the currently
active company instead of the user's default one.
<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/7e3a5d65-9114-4bce-9139-a88cff7c261f" />
</div>
<p><strong>After:</strong></p>
<div class="image-row">
<img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a105f80-b6ae-400d-a787-fb8706d5f519" />
</div>
</details>
---
opw-6345446
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273595**Issue** A credit note created before returning any stock may compute an incorrect COGS value. **Steps to reproduce** - Create a product valued with AVCO and a standard price of 10 - Create and confirm a SO for 2 units - Create and post the invoice - Change the product's standard price to 20. - Create a credit note without returning the delivered stock -> The cogs value on the credit note is 40 instead of 20 **Cause** While posting the credit note: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/bl
Original PR description
**Issue** A credit note created before returning any stock may compute an incorrect COGS value. **Steps to reproduce** - Create a product valued with AVCO and a standard price of 10 - Create and…
**Issue** A credit note created before returning any stock may compute an incorrect COGS value. **Steps to reproduce** - Create a product valued with AVCO and a standard price of 10 - Create and confirm a SO for 2 units - Create and post the invoice - Change the product's standard price to 20. - Create a credit note without returning the delivered stock -> The cogs value on the credit note is 40 instead of 20 **Cause** While posting the credit note: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/sale/models/account_move.py#L62 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L5580 COGS lines are created: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/account_move.py#L46 which needs to compute the unit_price: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f715337f70bf7eaa8f084da6cd42d674d7a4bfe0/addons/stock_account/models/account_move.py#L132 which is initially computed from the original invoice line: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/account_move.py#L308-L317 However, the `sale_stock` override recomputes that value whenever the invoice line is linked to a sales order: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/sale_stock/models/account_move.py#L173 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/sale_stock/models/account_move.py#L212-L213 This computation will give the standard price since: - `is_returned` is True but no return move, which means there won't be any candidate: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L921-L923 - As a result, `qty_valued` is zero: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L933-L936 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/stock_valuation_layer.py#L172-L173 - The computation therefore falls back to the current standard price: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/844853be7956416c0cdcdeeb0d5f22422b528e5c/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L938-L946 opw-6369550 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276926
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"  This happens after the attribute `t-key` was added to the template [\[1\]] because the template is only use
Original PR description
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…
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"

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.

[\[1\]]: 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#179017Once a ZATCA invoice is posted, the "Reset to Draft" button is still shown on the form until the chain index is set on the move. In that window, a user can click it (or force it visible from Studio on an already-accepted invoice) and reset the move to draft, even though it has been -- or is about to be -- submitted to ZATCA. The invoice can then be resubmitted, breaking the ZATCA chain. Steps to reproduce: 1. Configure a SA company and set up ZATCA. 2. Create and post a customer invoice. 3
Original PR description
Once a ZATCA invoice is posted, the "Reset to Draft" button is still shown on the form until the chain index is set on the move. In that window, a user can click it (or force it visible from Studio on an already-accepted invoice) and reset the move to draft, even though it has been -- or is about to be -- submitted to ZATCA. The invoice can then be resubmitted, breaking the ZATCA chain. Steps to reproduce: 1. Configure a SA company and set up ZATCA. 2. Create and post a customer invoice. 3. On the posted invoice, click "Reset to Draft" -> the move becomes draft, while the ZATCA submission still goes through. Fix: - Add a user error on account.move.button_draft if the invoice has l10n_sa_chain_index set task-6208977 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 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270766
Currently, the property value is not displayed on the Kanban card, even when the `Display in Cards` option is enabled. This PR ensures that if `Display in Cards` option is enabled for a property, its value is displayed on the corresponding equipment Kanban card. **Steps to reproduce:** - Install the Maintenance module. - Open `Equipment`. - Open an existing equipment record or create a new one and save it. - Click the actions (gear) menu from the equipment form view. - Select `Add Prop
Original PR description
Currently, the property value is not displayed on the Kanban card, even when the `Display in Cards` option is enabled. This PR ensures that if `Display in Cards` option is enabled for a property, its value is displayed on the corresponding equipment Kanban card. **Steps to reproduce:** - Install the Maintenance module. - Open `Equipment`. - Open an existing equipment record or create a new one and save it. - Click the actions (gear) menu from the equipment form view. - Select `Add Properties`. - Add a property and enable the `Display in Cards` option. Open the Kanban view. **Expected behavior:** The property value should be displayed on the Kanban card when the `Display in Cards` option is enabled. Issue: [#277479](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/issues/277479) Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277757
Before this commit, when adding a line without a product to an invoice or credit note, `_get_most_frequent_account_for_partner` picked the partner's most-used account, filtered to an income or expense account depending on `get_inbound_types` and `get_outbound_types`. Those helpers classify move types by cash-flow direction which is correct for choosing a receivable and payable account but wrong for choosing an income ro expense account: they group `in_refund` with `out_invoice` as "inbound",
Original PR description
Before this commit, when adding a line without a product to an invoice or credit note, `_get_most_frequent_account_for_partner` picked the partner's most-used account, filtered to an income or…
Before this commit, when adding a line without a product to an invoice or credit note, `_get_most_frequent_account_for_partner` picked the partner's most-used account, filtered to an income or expense account depending on `get_inbound_types` and `get_outbound_types`. Those helpers classify move types by cash-flow direction which is correct for choosing a receivable and payable account but wrong for choosing an income ro expense account: they group `in_refund` with `out_invoice` as "inbound", and `out_refund` with `in_invoice` as "outbound". As a result, a Vendor Credit Note line with no product would be filtered to income accounts instead of expense accounts, and a Customer Credit Note line to expense accounts instead of income accounts. This only surfaced for contacts who are both customer and vendor, since the query needs matching history to return a result; otherwise it silently falls back to the journal's default account, masking the bug for ordinary contacts. This commit uses `get_sale_types` and `get_purchase_types` instead, which classify by document side, sale vs. purchase rather than cash-flow direction, matching the classification already used for product-based lines `is_sale_document` and `is_purchase_document` opw-6373124 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276846
### Issue before this commit: When importing an electronic invoice from SDI that is failing with an exception, the resulting account.move record was saved in the "Miscellaneous Operations" journal instead of the correct one (Vendor Bills), even though the move_type itself was correct. ### Steps to reproduce the issue: Pre steps: you need to have access to https://iap-services-test.odoo.com/odoo 1. Download Accounting and l10n_it 2. Go to Settings > Companies and set the VAT of IT company
Original PR description
### Issue before this commit: When importing an electronic invoice from SDI that is failing with an exception, the resulting account.move record was saved in the "Miscellaneous Operations" journal…
### Issue before this commit: When importing an electronic invoice from SDI that is failing with an exception, the resulting account.move record was saved in the "Miscellaneous Operations" journal instead of the correct one (Vendor Bills), even though the move_type itself was correct. ### Steps to reproduce the issue: Pre steps: you need to have access to https://iap-services-test.odoo.com/odoo 1. Download Accounting and l10n_it 2. Go to Settings > Companies and set the VAT of IT company the same as the one in the xml 3. Go to Settings > Italian Electronic Invoicing and select Test 4. Go into the code and insert an Exception inside the function _l10n_it_edi_import_invoice after self.move_type = move_type (or create any type of exception from the user interface) 5. Go to IAP service into IT EDI app and see that your company is there as user 6. Click into the record > receive move button > upload your xml > create 7. Go to your DB > Scheduled Actions > filter with IT > IT EDI: Receive invoices from the SdI > Run Manually 8. Go to Journal entries, remove the filter and find your imported bill 9. You can see it was inserted into the Miscellaneous Operations Journal instead of a Vendor Bill Journal ### Cause of the issue: The move is created inside a savepoint context manager, designed so that even if parsing fails, an empty move with the attachment still remains. The problem is that if the exception is raised, the savepoint rollback undoes everything that follows, but the journal was already determined before the correct move_type was known, leaving the move in the wrong default journal. ### Reason to introduce the fix: The fix is needed to ensure that, regardless of where parsing fails, the move's journal is correctly set even if an exception occurs so that it is possible to find the move in the correct section even if not imported correctly. opw-6397712 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278472 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278111
**Problem:** When creating a new task, the Customer does not follow the project the user selects: once a first project has filled it, selecting another project keeps the previous project's customer. **Steps to reproduce:** 1. Create a new task and select a project that has a customer. 2. The Customer is set to that project's customer. 3. Select another project configured with a different customer. 4. Observe the Customer keeps the first project's customer. **Current behavior:** The C
Original PR description
**Problem:** When creating a new task, the Customer does not follow the project the user selects: once a first project has filled it, selecting another project keeps the previous project's customer.…
**Problem:** When creating a new task, the Customer does not follow the project the user selects: once a first project has filled it, selecting another project keeps the previous project's customer. **Steps to reproduce:** 1. Create a new task and select a project that has a customer. 2. The Customer is set to that project's customer. 3. Select another project configured with a different customer. 4. Observe the Customer keeps the first project's customer. **Current behavior:** The Customer keeps the first selected project's customer. **Expected behavior:** The Customer follows the selected project and shows its customer. **Cause of the issue:** partner_id is filled by _compute_partner_id, which only assigns a partner while the field is empty. Once a project has filled it, selecting another project no longer refreshes the now non-empty Customer. **Fix:** Refresh the Customer from the project on project_id change, but only while the task is new (no _origin). An existing task's customer is left untouched, since it may already carry sale order lines, timesheets, materials or worksheets that must not be reset when the project changes. opw-6315902 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276289 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276211
The state_id field was not cleared when editing an address and switching to a country without states — the state selector reset visually, but the stale state_id was still saved to the backend. Steps to reproduce: 1. Add a product to the cart. 2. Go to checkout and edit the address, selecting a country that has states. 3. Edit the address again, now selecting a country without states. 4. Save and check the contact in the backend: state_id still holds the state from the previo
Original PR description
The state_id field was not cleared when editing an address and switching to a country without states — the state selector reset visually, but the stale state_id was still saved to the backend. Steps to reproduce: 1. Add a product to the cart. 2. Go to checkout and edit the address, selecting a country that has states. 3. Edit the address again, now selecting a country without states. 4. Save and check the contact in the backend: state_id still holds the state from the previous country. Solution: reset the state_id select options for the new country. --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278125
**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:** [FIX] website_sale: preserve parent company link on address update When a portal user linked to a company (B2B) edits their address during website checkout, the backend partner form subsequently loses the visual link to their parent company and incorrectly displays a "Create company" button instead. This occurs because the checkout form submits the company name as a raw text string (`company_name`). This string gets passed in t
Original PR description
**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:** [FIX] website_sale: preserve parent company link on address update When a portal user linked to a company (B2B) edits their address during…
**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**
[FIX] website_sale: preserve parent company link on address update
When a portal user linked to a company (B2B) edits their address during
website checkout, the backend partner form subsequently loses the visual
link to their parent company and incorrectly displays a "Create company"
button instead.
This occurs because the checkout form submits the company name as a raw
text string (`company_name`). This string gets passed in the payload and
is written to the contact's record. In the backend `res.partner` form
view, the presence of data in the `company_name` field triggers UI
modifiers that hide the `parent_id` relational field and switch to the
B2C company creation flow.
This commit resolves the issue by conditionally removing `company_name`
from the payload if the user already has a `parent_id`. This ensures the
raw text is safely ignored for B2B users, keeping the backend UI intact
while preserving the expected behavior for unlinked B2C users.
opw-6374326
**Steps to Reproduce:**
- Contacts > New
- Set type to “Company”, any name, any Tax ID
- (On same page) > Contacts & Addresses > Add
- Set type to “Contact”, set any name/email
- Access the previously created (individual) contact > settings/gear icon > grant portal access > Grant Access
- Access the (individual) contact user form > settings/gear icon > Change Password > (any)
- Log in as portal user > add item to cart > checkout > Modify address and save
- Access the created (individual) contact again
- Observe “Create company” button despite partner_id being set. In addition, the company name is shown correctly, but no link appears
**Current behavior before PR:**
- When a portal user linked to a company edits their address during website checkout, the backend partner form stores the company_name field and hides the link to the parent company while displaying a "Create company" button
**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
- Portal users linked to a company should be able to edit their address without losing UI links to the parent company in the partner form
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275468Miscellaneous changes
When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process. The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the m
Original PR description
When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a…
When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process. The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding. Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better. 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 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869