**Steps to reproduce the issue:**

- Install the l10n_mx_edi module.
- Open the Accounting app and go to Customers → Invoices.
- From the invoice line, make the Tax Object field visible.
- Create a new invoice and add a product that has no Unit Price.
- Save the invoice.
- Edit the same invoice, set a Unit Price for the product, and save it again.
- Issue: The Tax Object field is not automatically set after the Unit Price is added.

**Description:**

- In our standard code, there is a condition that skips computing the Tax Object when the Unit Price is [0](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/615a5f756d708db95e22cdbdd6e7aca72ac769ec/l10n_mx_edi/models/account_move.py#L988). This is the expected behavior.
- However, after setting a Unit Price on the product, the Tax Object is not recomputed, so it remains unset.
- To resolve this issue, I added price_unit to the @api.depends decorator so that the Tax Object is recomputed whenever the Unit Price changes.

**Reference videos:**

Before the fix:
[screen-capture (2).webm](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c1162fd9-52b8-4a8c-9ac2-39cf2ca3ad69)


After the fix:
[screen-capture (1).webm](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1c05dc34-6778-487a-9bfc-635cf652e670)


OPW -6305080 
UPG - 4268848

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125098
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123009

## Steps to reproduce:

1. Install `l10n_br`, `l10n_br_avatax`, and `l10n_br_edi_fiscal_reform`.
2. Ensure that Demo mode is activated if not on Runbot.
3. Navigate to Contacts, then click into "BR Company Customer Estimated Profit".
4. Duplicate this contact, then set the following fields:
   1. Tax Regime set to individual
   2. ICMS Taxpayer Type set to Non-Taxpayer
5. Swtich to the BR Company and go to Accounting / Configuration / Settings.
6. Set up a Sandbox Avalara account and enable logging payload responses.
7. Navigate to Accounting > Customers > Invoices.
8. Create an invoice with:
   1. Customer set to the copy created earlier.
   2. Operation Type set to Sale of Goods
   3. Document Type set to 55
   4. Payment Method Brazil set to Money
   5. Presence set to Present
   6. One sales order line with:
      1. Regular Consumable Product
      2. quantity set to 1
      3. price set to 100.0
9. Confirm the invoice.
10. Navigate back to Accounting > Configuration > Settings to view the response from Avalara. The customer will have the CFOP 6102 instead of CFOP 6108.

Explanation:

PR #97845 introduced `_l10n_br_deep_clean_dict()` to remove falsy values and empty dictionaries from the payload we send to Avalara. This fix was applied as broadly as possible to prevent excessive if statements.

However, if the falsy values in taxSettings of the customer are not communicated, Avalara will assign the customer to an incorrect CFOP.

opw-6085964

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124730
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120783

**Problem:**
On a website with rental planning enabled, a customer can book a planning-backed rental product through eCommerce even when no planning resource is free for the requested window. The cart lets them increase the quantity past the available capacity and proceed all the way through checkout without any availability gate.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Install `website_sale_renting_planning`.
2. Create a planning role with `sync_shift_rental` and one resource.
3. Create a service product with `rent_ok=True`, `planning_enabled=True` and the role above.
4. Pre-book the resource for some window via a `planning.slot`.
5. From eCommerce, add the product to the cart for the same window.
6. Proceed to checkout/payment.

**Current behavior:**
The cart is considered ready, no warning is shown, and payment can proceed even though no planning resource is free for the chosen period.

**Expected behavior:**
The cart should be flagged as not ready and pre-payment validation should refuse to confirm until the customer picks a different date or quantity.

**Cause of the issue:**
`sale.order._available_dates_for_renting` in `website_sale_renting` is the documented hook for "stock availability" gating of the cart and pre-payment flow (called from `_is_cart_ready` and from `_check_cart_is_ready_to_be_paid`). `website_sale_stock_renting` overrides it to apply a per-line stock check, but
`website_sale_renting_planning` has no such override, so planning-backed rental services reach payment with no availability gate at all.

**Fix:**
Apply the same gating pattern that `website_sale_stock_renting` already uses: override `_available_dates_for_renting` in `website_sale_renting_planning` so that, for each rental line whose product is a planning-synced rentable service, the cart is only considered valid when at least the requested quantity of planning resources is free during the rental window (mirroring the resource and leave filtering already done by `_planning_slot_vals_list_per_sol` at SO confirmation time). This puts the gate at the same point the stock-renting flow enforces it, keeping the public cart/checkout flow consistent across rentable product types.

opw-6247034

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125534
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118943

Following the fix made in community branch, this adds a test veryfing the expected behavior in case of a fluctuating rate for the domestic currency.

Scenario 2: fluctuating domestic (USD) rate
 USD rate=1 from Jan 1 to Jun 30, USD rate=3 from Jul 1 to Dec 31
 EUR rates unchanged: 2 from Jan 1, 4 from Jul 1

 Correct conversion factors (= USD_rate / EUR_rate):
  Jan 1 – Jun 30 (182 days): 1/2 = 0.50
  Jul 1 – Dec 31 (184 days): 3/4 = 0.75

 Current rate at 2020-12-31:      3/4 = 0.75
 Correct average rate:            (0.50 * 182 + 0.75 * 184) / 366 = 229/366 ≈ 0.62568
 Previsouly bugged average rate (USD fixed at current=3): (1.50 * 182 + 0.75 * 184) / 366 = 411/366 ≈ 1.12295

 Historical equity rates (correct vs previously bugged):
  Mar 1 (USD=1, EUR=2): correct = 1/2 = 0.50; buggy = 3/2 = 1.50  → 40 * 0.50 = 20 vs 40 * 1.50 = 60
  Oct 1 (USD=3, EUR=4): correct = 3/4 = 0.75; buggy = 3/4 = 0.75  → 60 * 0.75 = 45 (same by coincidence)

task-5953104

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123055

## Problem

When generating an export CFE (e-Factura Exportación) in the Uruguayan EDI module, invoices that include a discount line equal to the subtotal — resulting in a **total of 0.00** — were not handled correctly by the XML/CFE generation
logic.

This use case is valid and required by exporters who need to reflect the declared value of goods/services while invoicing at zero (e.g. to comply with customs or incoterm requirements such as FCA). In Uruware's validation portal, the "Descuentos y Recargos" (discounts & surcharges) section of the subtotal block must be correctly populated for the CFE to be accepted.

**Example:** An invoice with a line of 648.00 UYU and a global discount of −648.00 UYU → Total: 0.00. The export value is still declared, taxes are zero, but the CFE must reflect the discount amount explicitly.

<img width="592" height="679" alt="example_expo_invoice_discount" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/aa83c158-e342-4da5-a251-fc209bbed5c4" />

## Root Cause

The CFE template (`cfe_template.xml`) and the move computation logic (`account_move.py`) did not account for the case where export invoices carry line-level or global discounts that zero out the total. The discount amount was
either omitted from the XML nodes or computed incorrectly, causing Uruware validation to fail or the discount block to not render.

## Fix

- **`l10n_uy_edi/models/account_move.py`** — Updated the export invoice computation to correctly include discount amounts in the CFE data dict, ensuring the `ValorDR` is filled with the value of the discount per line.
- **`l10n_uy_edi/views/cfe_template.xml`** — Adjusted the template condition so `MntExpoyAsim` node accepts 0 as value.

## Steps to Reproduce (before fix)

1. Create an export invoice (e-Factura Exportación) for a foreign partner.
2. Add a product line with a unit price, e.g. 216.00 × 3 = 648.00 UYU.
3. Add a global discount of 648.00 (same amount) so the total is 0.00.
4. Confirm and send to Uruware — the CFE is rejected / discount block is missing.

## Verification

After the fix, the same invoice generates a valid CFE accepted by Uruware with the discount correctly reflected in the `DscRcgGlobal` node and the discount line visible on the printed document.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124910
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120130

## Issue
When creating a Contract Template for a Swiss company, the template does not match the version shown in the Employee's view. Also, some fields are not correctly applied when loading a contract template on an employee (e.g. `hourly_wage`, `wage`, ...).

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Switzerland - Swissdec Certified ELM 5.0 - Payroll* (`l10n_ch_hr_payroll`)
2. (Create and) Use a Swiss company
3. In Employees > Configuration > Contract Templates, create a Contract Template
    - Wage Type: Hourly Wage
    - Hourly Wage: Any value > 0
    - **(Notice how the aforementionned fields are missing from the template)**
4. In Employees > Employees, create an Employee
5. On the new employee's view, on the Payroll tab, click "Load Template"
and load the template created in step 3
6. **The data from the template is not applied to the employee's contract**

## Cause
The fields loaded from a contract template are listed in the `whitelist` variable of the `hr.version.wizard`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5c3deb11627f4d6762c4994207bd582afb96f064/addons/hr/wizard/hr_contract_template_wizard.py#L15-L30

Multiple fields were missing from the whitelist (e.g. `hourly_wage`, `l10n_ch_has_{hourly|monthly|lesson}`, ...). These fields would not be loaded from the template when applying a template on an employee.

**This commit replicates the employee's version view on the contract template and adds the related fields to the whitelist for them to be correctly applied when loading a contract template.**

opw-5966664
opw-6128467

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125212
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#110683

### Issue before this commit:
When reverting a Guatemalan invoice (creating a credit note), the XML node FechaEmisionDocumentoOrigen incorrectly reports the EDI document's technical certification date instead of the original invoice's emission date. This causes the SAT to reject the document.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_gt
2. Revert an invoice (credit note) inserting a different date than the one of the invoice
3. See that FechaEmisionDocumentoOrigen report the date of the credit note instead of the one of the invoice

### Cause of the issue:
The _l10n_gt_edi_add_reference_values method extracted the date from original_document.datetime (the technical timestamp of when the XML was generated) rather than using the actual accounting date of the original invoice.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
SAT validation rules strictly require the reference date to match the exact commercial emission date of the original invoice. Fetching invoice_date directly ensures compliance, avoids timezone conversion errors, and prevents the XML from being rejected.
Source: https://www.lawinsider.com/es/contracts/dJXl4Vo79L2

<img width="730" height="205" alt="2026-07-17_10-19" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/802e7bb3-fcf9-48db-b86f-227b494001b6" />

opw-6394409

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124794

### Problem

`Mail: Fetchmail Service` cron aborts with `AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'upper'` in `l10n_cl_edi/models/fetchmail_server.py::_process_incoming_customer_claim` when an incoming customer claim DTE has no `<RUTRecep>`:

```python
dte.findtext('.//ns0:RUTRecep', ...).upper() or
dte.findtext('.//ns0:RutReceptor', ...).upper()
```

`findtext()` returns `None` when the tag is missing, so `.upper()` blows up before the `or` fallback can run. Once the cron hits such a message it re-crashes on every subsequent run and blocks the whole mailbox until the offending mail is deleted.

### Fix

Guard each `findtext(...)` with `or ''` so the `or` chain actually falls through. Empty `partner_vat` is already handled by the existing "Partner … has not been found" branch a few lines below.

### Traceback (Odoo 19)

```
File "/mnt/extra-addons/enterprise/l10n_cl_edi/models/fetchmail_server.py", line 285, in _process_incoming_customer_claim
    dte.findtext('.//ns0:RUTRecep', namespaces=XML_NAMESPACES).upper() or
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'upper'
```

### Ticket

No ticket open for this but opw-5257481 is related.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123387

Commit: odoo/odoo@2406a96765cc76de94d356dfd3b27cf98de82d7 made the computation of related fields go through `sudo()` unconditionally, to keep cache consistency with x2m related fields, which are themselves fetched in sudo.

That override, however, applies to every many2one related/inherited field, not just x2m ones, and ignores the field's own `compute_sudo` attribute. For a field with `compute_sudo=False`, the compute is still forced through `sudo()`, while every subsequent cache lookup on that field (in `Field.__get__`) is done on the non-sudo environment.

This is visible on `res.users.main_user_id`, an inherited field `res.partner.main_user_id` (compute_sudo=False, depends_context('uid')). The compute succeeds, but the resulting value is written into the sudo cache instead of the caller's cache, so the non-sudo cache check right after considers it missing:
```py
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1827, in __get__
    raise ValueError(f"Compute method failed to assign {missing_recs}.{self.name}")
ValueError: Compute method failed to assign res.users(2,).main_user_id
```
Confirmed in pdb: the id is missing from the plain cache but present in the sudo one:
```py
> /home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/fields.py(1823)__get__()
-> missing_recs_ids = tuple(self._cache_missing_ids(recs))
(Pdb) tuple(self._cache_missing_ids(recs))
(2,)
(Pdb) tuple(self._cache_missing_ids(recs.sudo()))
()
```

Steps to reproduce:
- in saas~19.3, open the Users list view
- using Studio, add the `main_user_id` field to the list view
- the view fails to load with: "The requested change caused an error in the view. It could be because a field was deleted, but still used somewhere else."
- The error in logs is the `ValueError` mentioned above

Restrict the forced `sudo()` to x2m fields, which is what the original comment describes and what actually needs it, and let many2one related fields honor their own `compute_sudo` like every other compute does.



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

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

report_stock_quantity uses m.quantity instead of the done quantity converted to the product's base UoM when computing the forecast for done inter-warehouse moves. This causes incorrect forecast values when a done stock move uses a UoM with a factor greater than 1.

Current behavior before PR:

When a done inter-warehouse move uses a UoM with factor > 1 (e.g. a box of 25 units), the forecast only subtracts the raw done quantity (e.g. 2 boxes) instead of the converted quantity in the product's base UoM (e.g. 50 units). This causes the forecast chart to show incorrect negative values before the move date.

Steps to reporduce:

- Create a storable product with base UoM = Units
- Create a UoM "Box of 25" with factor = 25 in the Units category, and add it to the product's allowed UoMs
- Create a second warehouse
- Do an inventory adjustment of 800 units into warehouse 1
- Create an inter-warehouse transfer of 2 "Box of 25" (= 50 units) from warehouse 1 to warehouse 2 and validate it
- Open the forecast chart for the product filtered to warehouse 1

Desired behavior after PR is merged:

The forecast report for done inter-warehouse moves correctly converts the done quantity to the product's base UoM using the move's UoM factor, so the forecast chart shows accurate values regardless of the UoM used on the move.


opw-6266745


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273797
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271766

Currently, sending a simplified invoice (`TD07`) to the Italian Tax
Agency fails when an invoice line contains multiple taxes.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_it_edi_withholding` module and switch to an IT Company.
- Create a new customer and set only the country to Italy and the Tax ID.
- Create a new invoice for that customer.
- Add a line with `22%` and `4% INPS` taxes.
- Go to the `Electronic Invoicing` tab, set the `Document Type` to
 `TD07 - Simplified invoice`, and confirm the invoice.
- Try to `Send To Tax Agency`.

**Error:**
`Node: <Natura t-if="line.tax_ids.l10n_it_exempt_reason" t-out="line.tax_ids.l10n_it_exempt_reason"/>`
`ValueError: Expected singleton: account.tax(102, 3)`

**Root Cause:**
At [1], the code accesses `line.tax_ids.l10n_it_exempt_reason`, but when an
invoice contains multiple taxes, causing an error.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents the error and ensures the user can send a simplified 
invoice by applying a fix similar to [2].

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/230483ffd7d8674cd6bf98a4ffb6591f755422e0/addons/l10n_it_edi/data/invoice_it_simplified_template.xml#L14

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/230483ffd7d8674cd6bf98a4ffb6591f755422e0/addons/l10n_it_edi/data/invoice_it_template.xml#L28-L181

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6354138)
Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6379377)
opw-6354138
opw-6379377

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278307
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273823

Problem:
When computing inventory valuation or available quantities for a date in the past (using the  context), the system calculates the past quantity by taking the current stock quants and rolling back the stock moves that occurred after the requested date.

However, when the environment context specified an ownership filter (e.g.,  to calculate company-owned valuation), this filter was only being applied to the  domain. The rollback domains for incoming and outgoing  records remained completely open.

As a result, the system would correctly see 0 company-owned current stock, but it would erroneously subtract incoming consigned stock moves from that balance. This resulted in an artificially negative past quantity and a negative inventory valuation for company-owned stock.

Solution:
This commit ensures the  context is applied symmetrically by filtering the rollback moves via the  field. The
time-travel calculation will now only evaluate stock moves that match the queried ownership context.

Steps to reproduce (runbot v19):
- Consignment enabled
- FIFO perpetual product w/ nonzero value
1. Create an inventory adjustment for an internal location, set the owner on the quant
2. Create a delivery for this product, but don't zero out all of the available stock
3. Go to Accounting > Review > Inventory Valuation, and set the At Date to something far in the past, before any move history in the db. The product's current on hand value will appear in ending stock, but negative.

opw-6300582

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274492
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270409

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

When a POS order is invoiced after its session has been closed, `_create_misc_reversal_move` builds a misc entry that reverses the portion of the closing entry corresponding to that order. It does so by negating `balance` and `amount_currency` on every prepared line, but leaves `tax_base_amount` on tax lines untouched.

As a result the reversal move ends up with tax lines whose `balance` sign is flipped relative to the source order while `tax_base_amount` keeps the source sign, breaking the invariant
`sign(balance) == sign(tax_base_amount)` that holds for every other correctly-generated tax line in the system.

Downstream, any report reading `tax_base_amount` directly (Audit view from the Tax Report, Journal Items XLSX export, custom exports) shows a base amount signed for the wrong direction alongside a debit/credit of the opposite sign, which is confusing and, for tax returns computed from `tax_base_amount`, incorrect.

Negate `tax_base_amount` alongside `balance` and `amount_currency` so the reversal move stays internally consistent.

opw-5975658

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#276534

When matching Purchase Order lines with Vendor Bill lines from the Bill Matching view,
if a PO and its vendor bill each contain several lines for the same product,
all bill lines of that product get matched to the first PO line only.
The remaining PO line(s) stay unmatched and are then added back
to the bill as new (duplicate) lines.

Steps:

- Create a purchase order with two lines for the same product and confirm
- Create a draft bill with the same configuration and same partner
- From the PO, click on "Bill matching" button
- Select the 4 lines and click on the "Match" button
-> On the purchase order, first line has qty_invoiced == 2 and the
   second one 0
-> On the bill, there is an additional line with 0 quantity

This is because we only match the first order line in case of having more than
one line with the same product. Then we add the remaining order lines to
the bill.
With this commit we match each line that need to be matched and we add
lines to the bill only if all order lines have been invoiced.

opw-6279755

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277067
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269496

# How to reproduce
- In Contacts, Create a contact with name X and mail Y
- Go to the Recruitment App > Applications > All Applications
- Create a new Application with name Z, mail Y, any Job Position
- Save

# The problem
If we go back to the contact, we can see it's name changed from X to Z. This is an expect behavior since :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c06aefa827bc00a14c9f8bd994d1831053cbf7af

The issue lies in the fact that this change to the linked partner is not logged in the Applicant's form view. This may lead to contacts being unitentionally updated.

# The cause
`hr.applicant` inherits from 'mail.track.mixin', which correctly handles the logging in the chatter when editing an Applicant. However, the edition of the contact is triggered by an inverse function when creating the record, which is not handled by the inherited module : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/af50cb24ac536e6afb14eee8221c69906191ba2b/addons/hr_recruitment/models/hr_applicant.py#L248-L253

# Proposed solution
Use the `_track_record` method while tacking inspiration from : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3b5e4f558ccf9160e74e9e49ae324dd616241d61/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py#L2079

opw-6095671

[FIX] website_hr_recruitment: fix country filter

Bug reproduction:
    1 - Recruitment, you need to have 1 remote and 1 US jobs at least.
    2 - Go to job page in website, activate country filter.
    3 - Select US jobs and search for the remote job.
    4 - All countries filter is readonly and it is not pressable.

Bug cause:
    1 - Check is done with jobs value
        1.1 - If no matching, readonly button is displayed.

Bug solution:
    1 - count_per_filter is used instead of jobs
        1.1 - Even there are matchings for other countries, it shows.
    2 - Also, searched keyword is added to filter url
        2.1 - When there is search in other country and we click to it:
            2.2 - The searched keyword will be still there.

task-6284436

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#277726

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
A cash rounding line resolves its company-dependent profit/loss account against the active company instead of the invoice's own company, which breaks multi-company invoicing whenever the invoice's company differs from the active one.

Current behavior before PR:
- Enable Multi-Companies in the settings.
- Create a second company (Company B).
- Open Accounting > Configuration > Cash Roundings.
- Create a cash rounding with strategy "Add a rounding line" and precision 1.00.
- Make Company A the active company in the company switcher.
- Set the cash rounding's profit and loss accounts to Company A accounts.
- Switch the active company to Company B.
- Set the cash rounding's profit and loss accounts to Company B accounts.
- Make Company A the active company again, keeping both companies active.
- Create a customer invoice for Company B.
- Add one invoice line whose total is not a multiple of the rounding precision.
- Set the invoice's cash rounding to the one above.
> Adding the rounding line raises a cross-company UserError: the company-dependent account is resolved against Company A while the invoice belongs to Company B.

Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The rounding line resolves the company-dependent profit/loss account against the invoice's own company, so the rounding line always uses that company's account and no cross-company error is raised. Covered by the added test TestAccountMoveCashRoundingMultiCompany.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278401
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273410

**Issue:**
When an employee uses a fully fixed duration based working schedule and each half-day attendance has a decimal duration such as 3.36h, a multi-day half-day time off request can compute a decimal duration such as 5.01 days. This is inconsistent with half-day time off types, which should consume time in half-day increments.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Create an employee with a fully fixed duration-based schedule
- Set morning and afternoon attendances to 3.36 hours for each weekday
- Create a time off type with duration type set to half-day
- Create a time off request for the employee (e.g. Monday to Friday)
- The computed duration is 5.01 days instead of 5 days

**Cause:**
For half-day time off types, `number_of_days` was taken from generic calendar interval computation. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/19c0e59cc37c7671f13cbda1b2d4850a7731eade/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave.py#L585-L593 On duration-based schedules, this computation returns day values rounded at 0.001 precision, so decimal drift (e.g. 5.01) can appear, Since no final rounding to half-day steps was applied, half-day requests could end with non-half-day values.

**Solution:**
Round computed durations for half-day time off types to the nearest half-day increment.

opw-6215768

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278432
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267726

## Steps to Reproduce: _(cryptography version > 43.0.0)_
1. Install the `l10n_sa_edi` module.
2. Switch to SA Company.
3. Set the company name to an Arabic string between 32 and 64 characters. 
    (e.g; `مجموعة النخبة العالمية للاستشارات الفنية`)
5. Accounting > Configuration > Journals.
6. Open a Sales type journal.
7. Click "Re-onboard" in the ZATCA tab.
8. Enter an OTP and click "Request".

## Error:
`ValueError: Attribute's length must be >= 1 and <= 64, but it was 98`

## Cause:
The CSR validation checks the length of characters, if combined common_name (or other fields) are less than 64 characters, it passes the condition. - [1] But the cryptography library validates UTF-8 byte length for string values. Arabic characters take 2 bytes in UTF-8, causing the byte length to exceed the 64-byte limit enforced by the cryptography.

**Note:**
Starting with cryptography version 43.0.0, the library enforces the UTF-8 byte length limit for CSR string values during certificate creation. (Ref: https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/pull/11201)


## Fix:
Validate the UTF-8 encoded byte length instead of the character length.

[1] - https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/a66fedcaf555660e484a2becc49a9b7e602f5924/addons/l10n_sa_edi/models/certificate.py#L92

sentry-7608376856

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277822
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276861

**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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270129

[FIX] html_builder: fix job location editing on website
Scenario:
1) Head over to website
2) Go to any specific job page
3) Open editor
4) Try changing job location
5) Hit save

Result: The changes aren't saved or propagated into the backend.

Expectation: Users should be able to edit job locations via the
editor on website and have those changes reflect on the site
and job record.

Cause:
How elements were marked as savable was changed [in this IMP][1] to
rely on `o_savable` rather than the savable selectors resource. As a
result, elements which had the `o_not_editable` class, such as job
location, did not have `o_savable` added to them. These elements were
excluded from the builder's dirty-tracking for save. Therefore, editing
the location didn't mark the element as changed and saving to drop the
update.

Fix:
Remove `o_not_editable` from the location element on plugin setup so
the field is now editable and savable through the builder option.

This surfaced a second issue: when the location was set to "Remote",
the element's content could be directly editable inline. Saving it
that way disconnected the content from the job location field. This
was fixed by adjusting the selector that determines when a many2one's
content is editable inline. The result is the "Remote" case is handled
consistently as changing to any other location.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/f3c119dd034b4c3df9f392b0cdc66a1141662c25

Task-6311200

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274731

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. install l10n_sa_edi and l10n_sa_pos
2. onboard the company for ZATCA and link a printer to the PoS
3. make a PoS order with a customer and print the receipt 

-> the ZATCA QR code is too small to be scanned.

Why it's happening
------------------
The phase 2 QR code is big because it also contains the invoice hash, signature and public key. We render it at 200 px, which is too small to scan a QR with that much data. The QR image also has no max width, so it gets cut when the receipt is narrow.

The fix
-------
Render it at 400 px, and add `max-width: 100%` so it is not cut on a narrow receipt.

opw-6399766

Before
<img width="647" height="1036" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6bcb8526-71a8-4d9f-8372-219959416214" />


After
<img width="649" height="1031" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/70f5fdb5-ba71-4fbe-8f03-ef0a1b29be2e" />

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278499
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277813