### 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

## Current behavior:
In Vietnam's Sales Tax Report, when unfolding until the minimum layer, the VAT now displays the value in negative

## Expected behavior:
The VAT value in the minimum layer should be consistent with the upper layers and kept positive

## Steps to reproduce:
- Install l10n_vn (l10n_vn_reports will install as well)
- Switch to VN Company
- With demo data, go to Invoicing / Reporting / Tax Report
- Change Tax Report (VN) to Sales/Purchase Tax Report (VN)
- Unfold the lines all the way to the minimum layer: VAT on sales of goods and services 10% -> INV/2026/00003
- Observe that the VAT 10% line is at negative, which is inconsistent with the Total line below

## Cause of the issue:
- In Odoo, tax journal items store tax_base_amount with the accounting sign (negative for sales). This is expected behavior
- However, Vietnamese VAT listing expects commercial amounts, which means sales bases need to be displayed as positive numbers

## Fix:
Normalized tax_base_amount sign in _query_tax_lines function before building the SQL query

opw-6344577

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125257
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122785

The standard cron process reconciles batches of 100 bank statement lines at a time. In multi-company environments with large historical datasets, this query frequently timed out, exceeding the 15-minute execution limit. Even when throttled to a batch size of 10 records, the query required approximately 18.8 seconds to execute.

The performance degradation was driven by the following factors:

1. Suboptimal Lateral Filtering: The statement line batch array filter was placed inside the `LATERAL` block's `WHERE` clause. This prevented the query planner from optimizing the drive path effectively across iterations.
2. Inefficient Join Sequence and Filtering: The original join order scanned `account_move_line` before resolving the company hierarchy constraint. As a result, millions of rows across all companies were retrieved from the index, forcing repeated primary key lookups on `res_company` before ultimately discarding over 99.9% of the records via the late `parent_path` hierarchy filter.

This commit addresses these issues by:

1. Moving the `st_line.id` filtering constraint out of the lateral subquery and into the outer main query block to guide the execution path properly.
2. Reordering the inner `LATERAL` subquery to resolve the company hierarchy (`res_company`) prior to joining `account_move_line`. This constraints the scan boundaries early in the pipeline.

Performance Benchmarks (10 record batch):
- Before Execution Time: ~18,818 ms
- Before Shared Hit Blocks: 8,535,272
- After Execution Time: ~130 ms
- After Shared Hit Blocks: 67,204 ms

Before Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/h4739gh3519eaa43
After Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/5ebc5g8deff272gc

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125686
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125250

## Current behavior:
In Malaysia's Statement of Account, the total and total overdue amounts
dont consider the selected Statement Date, and will calculate all the
balances up until today in the generated PDF report

## Expected behavior:
The total and total overdue amounts should only sum the balances included
in the report up until the selected Statement Date

## Steps to reproduce:
1. Install l10n_my_reports module, switch to Malaysian company
2. Go inside Invoicing > Report > Aged receivable
3. Select a specific date in the past
4. Observe that the total amounts dont match with the balance column, and wont change regardless of the date selected

## Cause of the issue:
The template used o.total_overdue which ignores the report domain
and statement date

## Fix:
Accumulate overdue_total in the template loop with the same domain
and date_to cutoff as the balance lines, so it always matches
the displayed Balance lines for the selected Statement Date

opw-6332970

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125410
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123694

## Current behavior:
In Vietnam's Sales Tax Report, when unfolding until the minimum layer, the VAT now displays the value in negative

## Expected behavior:
The VAT value in the minimum layer should be consistent with the upper layers and kept positive

## Steps to reproduce:
- Install l10n_vn (l10n_vn_reports will install as well)
- Switch to VN Company
- With demo data, go to Invoicing / Reporting / Tax Report
- Change Tax Report (VN) to Sales/Purchase Tax Report (VN)
- Unfold the lines all the way to the minimum layer: VAT on sales of goods and services 10% -> INV/2026/00003
- Observe that the VAT 10% line is at negative, which is inconsistent with the Total line below

## Cause of the issue:
- In Odoo, tax journal items store tax_base_amount with the accounting sign (negative for sales). This is expected behavior
- However, Vietnamese VAT listing expects commercial amounts, which means sales bases need to be displayed as positive numbers

## Fix:
Normalized tax_base_amount sign in _query_tax_lines function before building the SQL query

opw-6344577

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125257
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122785

Currently, an error occurs when the "Payroll: Update Data" scheduled action is run.

**Steps to Reproduce:**

 - Install `l10n_au_hr_payroll` with demo data.
 - Switch to `Australian Company`.
 - Go to `Payroll` > `Configuration` > `Salary` > `Rule Categories`. 
 - Delete all records related to the `Australian Company`. 
 - Go to `Scheduled Actions` and run `Payroll: Update Data`.

`ValueError: External ID not found in the system: l10n_au_hr_payroll.rule_category_ote`

After [this commit], the category_id field becomes non-required, allowing users to delete a rule 
category record even if it is linked to a salary rule. When updating the data file [1], an error is 
raised due to the missing rule category.

This commit ensures that when updating the salary rule data, it updates the category data 
beforehand as like [here]

[this commit]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/c663fd2a81b7f6b34f8199fdbdc4a75c4f21379e

[1] https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b6612dd58276646b81a3a12cd48e8427ea5359c2/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L76-L83

[here]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b6612dd58276646b81a3a12cd48e8427ea5359c2/l10n_ch_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1074-L1087

sentry-7349905716

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121167

Currently, when users group accrual reports by dates, aggregated computed fields are not calculated correctly. As a result, values such as the total amount may be displayed as zero even when the grouped records contain non-zero amounts.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Purchase and Accounting
- Create a product `Energy drink Sample` with cost 10$
- Create and Confirm a PO with the energy drink sample with vendor as `Administrator`
- Set `Received` as 1.
- Go to Accounting > Review > Bill to Receive
- Search Filter> Remove vendor grouping > Use Custom Group `Order Date`
- Expand the group

## Observed Behavior
Although the grouped lines contain an amount of 10 dollars, the aggregated total displayed in the sum remains zero.

The total should reflect the combined value of the grouped lines.

## Root Cause:
This issue occurs because opening the view triggers `_read_group_for_accrual`, which overrides the `_read_group` method on purchase order lines. The purpose of this override is to support grouping on computed fields that are not stored in the database such as `amount_to_invoice_at_date (Amount)`, `qty_received_at_date (Received)`.

When `_read_group_for_accrual` is executed, it delegates grouping for non-computed fields to the parent `_read_group` implementation, as shown at [1].

The parent method returns results in `res` similar to: 
```
[(datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0), 1.0, 10.0, 1)]
```
During iteration over res at [2], the code uses `group[0]` as the grouping key. In this example, group[0] is `datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0)`, which represents the granularity date
(e.g., the first day of the month when grouping by month).

However, `records_by_group` is keyed by the actual purchase order line order dates rather than the granularity dates returned by `_read_group`. For example:
```
{datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 12, 0, 0): purchase.order.line(1,)}
```

As a result, the lookup performed using the granularity date (`datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0))` does not find a matching entry in `records_by_group`. Consequently, records falls back to an empty `purchase.order.line()` recordset.

Later, at [3], the aggregation logic computes totals using this empty recordset. Since the required fields are evaluated on an empty set of records, the aggregated values are computed as zero.

This ultimately causes the method to return a total value of zero
[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L9-L24 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L40-L42 
[3]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L44-L47

## Solution:
The issue can be resolved by grouping records using the same date granularity specified in the groupby, rather than using the field values.

By aligning the grouping logic with the granularity returned by `_read_group` (for example, grouping by the first day of the month when using monthly grouping ), the keys in `records_by_group` match the values returned in `res`. As a result, the corresponding records are correctly retrieved during aggregation.

This ensures that the aggregation is performed on the appropriate purchase order lines instead of an empty recordset, allowing the computed totals to be calculated correctly.

[opw-6261225](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6261225)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120369

Currently, an error occurs when grouping planning slots by role.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `Planning` module.
 - Go to `Planning` > `Configuration` > `Roles`.
 - Create a `role` without assigning any resource to it (or assign a resource without a working time).
 - Go to `Planning`, create a new `planning slot`, assign the `role` created above, set the start date to `20/07/2026 12:00 PM` and the end date to `21/07/2026 2:00 AM`.
 - Switch to the `Gantt view` of the `planning slots`.
 - Group by `Role` and set the custom date range to `07/19/2026 -> 07/20/2026`, then click `Apply`.

`KeyError: 1`

The error occurs when the user groups the planning slots by role in the Gantt view. During 
the computation of the Gantt progress bar, if the existing slot's role has no resource, or has 
a flexible resource without a calendar, the regular resources become empty [1]. Then it 
attempts to compute the valid work intervals for these empty resources [2], resulting in an 
empty calendar work interval dictionary ({}) [3]. Later, when computing the duration over the 
period with the valid range slots, it tries to access the resource directly from the empty 
calendar_intervals dictionary [4], which raises the error.

This commit ensures that, when no work intervals are available for a resource, an empty 
work interval is used instead.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3871b75fb74a7b35bfea9610ca08b853eb723320/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L307

[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5663509fe5caa1191fafcea3b3879dcef9ceca8f/addons/resource/models/resource_resource.py#L220

[3]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3871b75fb74a7b35bfea9610ca08b853eb723320/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L3415-L3417

[4]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/3871b75fb74a7b35bfea9610ca08b853eb723320/planning/models/planning_slot.py#L3300

sentry-7620222164

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124991

Currently, an error occurs when a user removes the payslip dates.

**Steps to reproduce:**

 - Install the `l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi` module with demo data.
 - Switch to `ZAPATERIA URTADO ÑERI` company
 - Go to `Payslips`, create a payslip.
 - Set an `employee`, and remove either the `start date` or the `end date` from Period..

`TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'bool' and 'relativedelta'`

After the [recent commit] adding a warning about the employee exceeding the salary limit, when the 
user removes the dates from the payslip, the compute method attempts to compute the warning 
from [1], and when it adds relativedelta to date_from, which is False, it raises the error [2].

This commit ensures that the payslip dates are checked first before adding relativedelta to the date 
and performing the comparison.

[recent commit]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/6abfa47dafe439f9328d606ef6ac5126ec6eb1f6

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/53a7fd4d53ffd510ad42632c69ce9d3a22c59e70/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1446

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/53a7fd4d53ffd510ad42632c69ce9d3a22c59e70/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py#L272-L276

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125479
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122643

Marketplace orders with discount lines could not match the
platform total: Odoo accumulated a small rounding residue vs Shopee's
total_amount / Lazada's order price.

sale_shopee
-----------
Changes:
- Fetch buyer-side escrow amounts via `_fetch_order_income` and pass them
  through `self.env.context` (`order_income`).
- Build item lines from the buyer-paid item price with `discount=0` and a
  recomputed tax-exclusive `price_unit`.
- Distribute order-level discounts (seller/platform vouchers and coins) as
  dedicated negative lines per product tax group via
  `_prepare_discount_lines_values`.
- Append a shipping line from `buyer_paid_shipping_fee` with fiscal-position
  mapped taxes.
- Reconcile any leftover residue with `_adjust_order_total` using a single
  tax-free amount-adjustment line.
- Register `default_discount_product` and configure it on upgrade (v1.1).


sale_lazada
-----------
- Port the same reconciliation model as shopee: reconciled line specs, discount=0 with
  discounted unit from paid_price, shipping line from shipping_fee, order-level
  "Discount line" distributed at order-level.

task-6112062

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125068
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117561

Previously, the `_preprocess_work_hours_data` method would abort early if no payslip was found for the given period. This prevented the correct generation or evaluation of expected Mexican work hours in contexts where a draft payslip does not yet exist (i.e., when an off-cycle payslip is initially generated for a given time period).

To resolve this, the strict dependency on the payslip record has been removed. It now falls back to the contract version's base data when a payslip is absent:
- The calendar defaults to the contract version's `resource_calendar_id`.
- The duration is assumed to be standard (`is_wrong_duration = False`).
- The Mexican schedule table (`l10n_mx_schedule_table`) is fetched globally from the environment (`hr.rule.parameter`) rather than relying on the payslip-specific helper method.

This ensures expected work hours and attendance fields are calculated consistently across all payroll workflows, regardless of whether the payslip has been instantiated.

opw-6351402

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125219

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

In MPS, if a product’s Bill of Materials (BOM) is not specified at the time of addition, the system will not correctly account for batch size.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Create a product with a bom that has a batch size of 2
* Open MPS
* Add the product
  - without specifying the bom
  - Route Manufacture
* Add 1 in the Forcast Demand -> the batch size from the bom it's not taken into account.

Observation:
-------------
When updating mps, it will call get_production_schedule_view_state: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L424 this function when calculating the quantity to resplenish will call _get_resplenish_qty: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L534 to know the quantity to resplenish it will need the batch size, in mps they will only consider the batch size from the bom registered: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7092dd2cc3578c3f22d1fbc82d958d57e2f93553/mrp_mps/models/mrp_mps.py#L863-L865 
Since there is no default value for bom_id, If there is no bom selected, there is no batch size.

opw-6259956

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124922
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119560

Steps to reproduce:
- Set the database language to Spanish (Latin America).
- Create a customer invoice, confirm it and send it to the SII.
- Print it using Print > Invoice PDF copy (Chile).
- Scroll to the CEDIBLE section at the bottom of the PDF.

Cause of the issue:
The CEDIBLE footer is merged into l10n_cl.report_invoice_document, which account.report_invoice (odoo/addons/l10n_cl/views/report_invoice.xml) renders with t-lang set to the invoice partner's lang, not the database/user language. The disclaimer text was hardcoded in English and relied on the regular translation to be shown in Spanish, so as
soon as the partner's lang field isn't Spanish, the translation lookup falls back to the untranslated English source, regardless of the database language.

Solution:
This disclaimer is boilerplate mandated by Chilean law: it must always be printed in Spanish, independently of the invoice partner's or current user's language. The same template already follows that rule a few lines above for the SII stamp block ("Timbre Electrónico SII..."), which is hardcoded in Spanish instead of relying on translation.

opw-6390207

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124916

If one of the Payroll Structure Types has the Scheduled Pay field unset,
opening the Payroll dashboard raises a traceback.

Steps to reproduce the error:
- Install ``hr_payroll`` module
- Go to Payroll > Configuration > Settings > Set Payroll Closing Date > Save
- Go to Payroll > Configuration > Structure Types > Create a new Structure Type > Unset Scheduled Pay
- Open Dashboard

Traceback:
```py
AttributeError: 'bool' object has no attribute 'title'
```

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/9a3ea83a432f42f62076a50fca6bc771a2de96bf/hr_payroll/models/hr_payroll_warning.py#L413-L419
The dashboard collects the scheduled pay values from all structure types and
later calls ``schedule.title()`` to build the labels. When a Structure Type has
no Scheduled Pay configured, so ``schedule`` becomes ``False``, leading to the traceback.

``_get_schedule_pay`` method can return False at [1],
So, It will generate the traceback from below line also. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8a3d87d51a9a3c4df656a328a9179ee43541022d/hr_payroll/models/hr_payroll_warning.py#L401

Solution:
Added a fallback value when default scheduled pay is False.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/8a3d87d51a9a3c4df656a328a9179ee43541022d/hr_payroll/models/hr_payroll_warning.py#L149-L154

sentry-7583037488

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122492

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

While trying to fix the SAT cron, we did not think it through
it could cause infinite cron triggering.
Indeed, the write_date is updated on every record that is handled.

Fix is manyfold:
- Avoid re-processing what we already check within the last 4 hours/12 hours
depending on the type of the document.
- The domain takes the *static* create date instead of the write_date
to make sure we don't endless re-process the same record and that
the window of 7/60 days applies.
- Limit the Vendor Bill to be checked only during 7 days after their creation.
- Use the create_date in the order of the search to ensure we process older
records first, before their time-window closes.
- Process the Vendor Bills last, this ensure Customer Invoices will be processed
in priority in case we are not able to process everything within the last 4/12 hours.

This is still imperfect and a little fragile, we will find a better solution
in master, most likely by adding a dedicated field to keep track of the
last SAT check.

See https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/123213
See https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/103272

task-none

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125598
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125317

In a [previous PR], a test was introduced to reject any `l10n_xx_hr_*` module that has a `countries` key in its manifest and depends on a module that also has that country key.

This test was too broad and rejected some valid cases:
1. A non-auto-install module can have a country key defined to add  flags in the apps kanban view. ([src])
2. A module that has a country-specific regular dependency, but not as an  auto-install condition.

The second case is illustrated by [l10n_us_hr_payroll], which should auto-install when `hr_payroll` is installed and a US company exists.
With the old test, achieving this required adding `l10n_us` to its auto-install dependencies. 
But, since `l10n_us` is not auto-installable, `l10n_us_hr_payroll` would not be installed if you create a DB with a US company and only install `hr_payroll`.

In practice, that module was still being installed via a [post-init hook] in `hr_payroll`. This hook was installing all `l10n_XX_hr_payroll` modules for each country where a company is located, which is the behavior of the `countries` parameter in the manifest.

This caused issues during upgrades as this runs late in the process: after the auto-discovery phase.
Modules installed by this hook would be considered as `uninstalled` until `hr_payroll` is loaded.


This commit narrows the check to only fail if:
- A module has a `country` key in its manifest, and
- It has a country-specific module in its **auto-install** dependencies.

Moreover, it modifies `l10n_us_hr_payroll` to correctly rely on the auto_install mechanism instead of the post-init hook.

[previous PR]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/101843
[src]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6df9f92a537aa4bb4ee5dc946fe31c4e56e6dfea/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_module.py#L271-L273
[l10n_us_hr_payroll]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/24a33ffb769557be498d61328522bb77f68d3a5a/l10n_us_hr_payroll/__manifest__.py
[post-init hook]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/85185595cfd1ee5310ceb9dc80c0589accad2f19/hr_payroll/__init__.py#L21

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125853
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120279

The standard cron process reconciles batches of 100 bank statement lines at a time. In multi-company environments with large historical datasets, this query frequently timed out, exceeding the 15-minute execution limit. Even when throttled to a batch size of 10 records, the query required approximately 18.8 seconds to execute.

The performance degradation was driven by the following factors:

1. Suboptimal Lateral Filtering: The statement line batch array filter was placed inside the `LATERAL` block's `WHERE` clause. This prevented the query planner from optimizing the drive path effectively across iterations.
2. Inefficient Join Sequence and Filtering: The original join order scanned `account_move_line` before resolving the company hierarchy constraint. As a result, millions of rows across all companies were retrieved from the index, forcing repeated primary key lookups on `res_company` before ultimately discarding over 99.9% of the records via the late `parent_path` hierarchy filter.

This commit addresses these issues by:

1. Moving the `st_line.id` filtering constraint out of the lateral subquery and into the outer main query block to guide the execution path properly.
2. Reordering the inner `LATERAL` subquery to resolve the company hierarchy (`res_company`) prior to joining `account_move_line`. This constraints the scan boundaries early in the pipeline.

Performance Benchmarks (10 record batch):
- Before Execution Time: ~18,818 ms
- Before Shared Hit Blocks: 8,535,272
- After Execution Time: ~130 ms
- After Shared Hit Blocks: 67,204 ms

Before Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/h4739gh3519eaa43
After Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/5ebc5g8deff272gc

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125686
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125250

## Current behavior:
In Malaysia's Statement of Account, the total and total overdue amounts
dont consider the selected Statement Date, and will calculate all the
balances up until today in the generated PDF report

## Expected behavior:
The total and total overdue amounts should only sum the balances included
in the report up until the selected Statement Date

## Steps to reproduce:
1. Install l10n_my_reports module, switch to Malaysian company
2. Go inside Invoicing > Report > Aged receivable
3. Select a specific date in the past
4. Observe that the total amounts dont match with the balance column, and wont change regardless of the date selected

## Cause of the issue:
The template used o.total_overdue which ignores the report domain
and statement date

## Fix:
Accumulate overdue_total in the template loop with the same domain
and date_to cutoff as the balance lines, so it always matches
the displayed Balance lines for the selected Statement Date

opw-6332970

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125410
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123694

Currently, when users group accrual reports by dates, aggregated computed fields are not calculated correctly. As a result, values such as the total amount may be displayed as zero even when the grouped records contain non-zero amounts.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Purchase and Accounting
- Create a product `Energy drink Sample` with cost 10$
- Create and Confirm a PO with the energy drink sample with vendor as `Administrator`
- Set `Received` as 1.
- Go to Accounting > Review > Bill to Receive
- Search Filter> Remove vendor grouping > Use Custom Group `Order Date`
- Expand the group

## Observed Behavior
Although the grouped lines contain an amount of 10 dollars, the aggregated total displayed in the sum remains zero.

The total should reflect the combined value of the grouped lines.

## Root Cause:
This issue occurs because opening the view triggers `_read_group_for_accrual`, which overrides the `_read_group` method on purchase order lines. The purpose of this override is to support grouping on computed fields that are not stored in the database such as `amount_to_invoice_at_date (Amount)`, `qty_received_at_date (Received)`.

When `_read_group_for_accrual` is executed, it delegates grouping for non-computed fields to the parent `_read_group` implementation, as shown at [1].

The parent method returns results in `res` similar to: 
```
[(datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0), 1.0, 10.0, 1)]
```
During iteration over res at [2], the code uses `group[0]` as the grouping key. In this example, group[0] is `datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0)`, which represents the granularity date
(e.g., the first day of the month when grouping by month).

However, `records_by_group` is keyed by the actual purchase order line order dates rather than the granularity dates returned by `_read_group`. For example:
```
{datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 12, 0, 0): purchase.order.line(1,)}
```

As a result, the lookup performed using the granularity date (`datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0))` does not find a matching entry in `records_by_group`. Consequently, records falls back to an empty `purchase.order.line()` recordset.

Later, at [3], the aggregation logic computes totals using this empty recordset. Since the required fields are evaluated on an empty set of records, the aggregated values are computed as zero.

This ultimately causes the method to return a total value of zero
[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L9-L24 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L40-L42 
[3]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L44-L47

## Solution:
The issue can be resolved by grouping records using the same date granularity specified in the groupby, rather than using the field values.

By aligning the grouping logic with the granularity returned by `_read_group` (for example, grouping by the first day of the month when using monthly grouping ), the keys in `records_by_group` match the values returned in `res`. As a result, the corresponding records are correctly retrieved during aggregation.

This ensures that the aggregation is performed on the appropriate purchase order lines instead of an empty recordset, allowing the computed totals to be calculated correctly.

[opw-6261225](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6261225)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120369

Currently, an error occurs when the "Payroll: Update Data" scheduled action is run.

**Steps to Reproduce:**

 - Install `l10n_au_hr_payroll` with demo data.
 - Switch to `Australian Company`.
 - Go to `Payroll` > `Configuration` > `Salary` > `Rule Categories`. 
 - Delete all records related to the `Australian Company`. 
 - Go to `Scheduled Actions` and run `Payroll: Update Data`.

`ValueError: External ID not found in the system: l10n_au_hr_payroll.rule_category_ote`

After [this commit], the category_id field becomes non-required, allowing users to delete a rule 
category record even if it is linked to a salary rule. When updating the data file [1], an error is 
raised due to the missing rule category.

This commit ensures that when updating the salary rule data, it updates the category data 
beforehand as like [here]

[this commit]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/c663fd2a81b7f6b34f8199fdbdc4a75c4f21379e

[1] https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b6612dd58276646b81a3a12cd48e8427ea5359c2/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L76-L83

[here]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b6612dd58276646b81a3a12cd48e8427ea5359c2/l10n_ch_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1074-L1087

sentry-7349905716

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121167

In a [previous PR], a test was introduced to reject any `l10n_xx_hr_*` module that has a `countries` key in its manifest and depends on a module that also has that country key.

This test was too broad and rejected some valid cases:
1. A non-auto-install module can have a country key defined to add  flags in the apps kanban view. ([src])
2. A module that has a country-specific regular dependency, but not as an  auto-install condition.

The second case is illustrated by [l10n_us_hr_payroll], which should auto-install when `hr_payroll` is installed and a US company exists.
With the old test, achieving this required adding `l10n_us` to its auto-install dependencies. 
But, since `l10n_us` is not auto-installable, `l10n_us_hr_payroll` would not be installed if you create a DB with a US company and only install `hr_payroll`.

In practice, that module was still being installed via a [post-init hook] in `hr_payroll`. This hook was installing all `l10n_XX_hr_payroll` modules for each country where a company is located, which is the behavior of the `countries` parameter in the manifest.

This caused issues during upgrades as this runs late in the process: after the auto-discovery phase.
Modules installed by this hook would be considered as `uninstalled` until `hr_payroll` is loaded.


This commit narrows the check to only fail if:
- A module has a `country` key in its manifest, and
- It has a country-specific module in its **auto-install** dependencies.

Moreover, it modifies `l10n_us_hr_payroll` to correctly rely on the auto_install mechanism instead of the post-init hook.

[previous PR]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/101843
[src]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6df9f92a537aa4bb4ee5dc946fe31c4e56e6dfea/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_module.py#L271-L273
[l10n_us_hr_payroll]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/24a33ffb769557be498d61328522bb77f68d3a5a/l10n_us_hr_payroll/__manifest__.py
[post-init hook]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/85185595cfd1ee5310ceb9dc80c0589accad2f19/hr_payroll/__init__.py#L21

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120279

Steps to reproduce:
- Set the database language to Spanish (Latin America).
- Create a customer invoice, confirm it and send it to the SII.
- Print it using Print > Invoice PDF copy (Chile).
- Scroll to the CEDIBLE section at the bottom of the PDF.

Cause of the issue:
The CEDIBLE footer is merged into l10n_cl.report_invoice_document, which account.report_invoice (odoo/addons/l10n_cl/views/report_invoice.xml) renders with t-lang set to the invoice partner's lang, not the database/user language. The disclaimer text was hardcoded in English and relied on the regular translation to be shown in Spanish, so as
soon as the partner's lang field isn't Spanish, the translation lookup falls back to the untranslated English source, regardless of the database language.

Solution:
This disclaimer is boilerplate mandated by Chilean law: it must always be printed in Spanish, independently of the invoice partner's or current user's language. The same template already follows that rule a few lines above for the SII stamp block ("Timbre Electrónico SII..."), which is hardcoded in Spanish instead of relying on translation.

opw-6390207

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124916

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Create a BOM for product P1 with one work order WO1
- Create 3 quality points linked to WO1 via the `operation_id` field
- Confirm a manufacturing order for P1:
    - 3 quality checks A → B → C are generated
- Open the shop floor for the work order:
    - Observe that all 3 quality checks are displayed
- Delete quality check B (the middle one)
- come back to the shop floor for the work order:
- Observe that quality check C is no longer displayed in the shop floor

Problem:
After deleting check B, check C disappeared from the shop floor. Quality checks are stored as a doubly-linked list via the `next_check_id` and `previous_check_id` fields on `quality.check`. The shop floor JS (`mrp_display_record.js`) traverses this list starting from the check with no `previous_check_id`, then follows `next_check_id` until the chain ends. When check B was deleted, it nullified the FK references pointing to it, leaving check A with `next_check_id = False` and check C with `previous_check_id = False`. The traversal from A therefore stopped immediately, and C was never reached.

No `unlink` override existed on `quality.check` to repair the chain before deletion.

Solution:
Added an `unlink` override that, before deleting each check, reconnects its predecessor and successor: if the deleted check has both a previous and a next, `prev.next_check_id` is set to `next` and `next.previous_check_id` is set to `prev`, preserving a valid chain for the remaining checks.

opw-6369298

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124118

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

Issue
-----
International deliveries for fractions of items (eg 500g of a product sold by kg) are rejected by Sendcloud.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Setup Sendcloud
	- Fedex international
- Create a product
	- weight: 1kg
	- valid hs code
- Create a contact (outside EU if the company is in EU)
- Deliver 0.5 of the product to the contact

> Error "... parcel not returned from Sendcloud"

Cause
-----
Sendcloud returns he folloing error:

> "The total weight for declared items exceeds the total weight set for the shipment."

This is because the `weight` set on the shipment

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L449-L464

corresponds to the weight of the package, whereas the weight set on the description of the product in `parcel_items` corresponds to the weight of one "full" unit of the product.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L327-L335

We cannot change the quantity in `parcel_items` to match the actual delivered one because the field should be an integer.

https://sendcloud.dev/api/v2/parcels/create-a-parcel-or-parcels#body-one-of-0-parcel-parcel-items-items-quantity

The price is also off, because it gets taken from the `move_line`, so it reflects the price of the actual quantity and not a "full" item.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/208a8a6a5adb8ec1f2710453c2ee3b54c55a9f1e/addons/stock_delivery/models/delivery_carrier.py#L235

Note that this issue is common to **all UoM types**.

Solution
-----
Since we cannot change the quantity, we can instead adapt the description and weight sent in `parcel_items`. For example, sending 300g of sugar, we would send
- description: "Sugar (0.3 kg)"
- weight: "0.300"

-----
Ticket:
opw-6346330

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124686

### 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

While trying to fix the SAT cron, we did not think it through
it could cause infinite cron triggering.
Indeed, the write_date is updated on every record that is handled.

Fix is manyfold:
- Avoid re-processing what we already check within the last 4 hours/12 hours
depending on the type of the document.
- The domain takes the *static* create date instead of the write_date
to make sure we don't endless re-process the same record and that
the window of 7/60 days applies.
- Limit the Vendor Bill to be checked only during 7 days after their creation.
- Use the create_date in the order of the search to ensure we process older
records first, before their time-window closes.
- Process the Vendor Bills last, this ensure Customer Invoices will be processed
in priority in case we are not able to process everything within the last 4/12 hours.

This is still imperfect and a little fragile, we will find a better solution
in master, most likely by adding a dedicated field to keep track of the
last SAT check.

See https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/123213
See https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/103272

task-none

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125598
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125317

The standard cron process reconciles batches of 100 bank statement lines at a time. In multi-company environments with large historical datasets, this query frequently timed out, exceeding the 15-minute execution limit. Even when throttled to a batch size of 10 records, the query required approximately 18.8 seconds to execute.

The performance degradation was driven by the following factors:

1. Suboptimal Lateral Filtering: The statement line batch array filter was placed inside the `LATERAL` block's `WHERE` clause. This prevented the query planner from optimizing the drive path effectively across iterations.
2. Inefficient Join Sequence and Filtering: The original join order scanned `account_move_line` before resolving the company hierarchy constraint. As a result, millions of rows across all companies were retrieved from the index, forcing repeated primary key lookups on `res_company` before ultimately discarding over 99.9% of the records via the late `parent_path` hierarchy filter.

This commit addresses these issues by:

1. Moving the `st_line.id` filtering constraint out of the lateral subquery and into the outer main query block to guide the execution path properly.
2. Reordering the inner `LATERAL` subquery to resolve the company hierarchy (`res_company`) prior to joining `account_move_line`. This constraints the scan boundaries early in the pipeline.

Performance Benchmarks (10 record batch):
- Before Execution Time: ~18,818 ms
- Before Shared Hit Blocks: 8,535,272
- After Execution Time: ~130 ms
- After Shared Hit Blocks: 67,204 ms

Before Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/h4739gh3519eaa43
After Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/5ebc5g8deff272gc

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125250

Currently, when users group accrual reports by dates, aggregated computed fields are not calculated correctly. As a result, values such as the total amount may be displayed as zero even when the grouped records contain non-zero amounts.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Purchase and Accounting
- Create a product `Energy drink Sample` with cost 10$
- Create and Confirm a PO with the energy drink sample with vendor as `Administrator`
- Set `Received` as 1.
- Go to Accounting > Review > Bill to Receive
- Search Filter> Remove vendor grouping > Use Custom Group `Order Date`
- Expand the group

## Observed Behavior
Although the grouped lines contain an amount of 10 dollars, the aggregated total displayed in the sum remains zero.

The total should reflect the combined value of the grouped lines.

## Root Cause:
This issue occurs because opening the view triggers `_read_group_for_accrual`, which overrides the `_read_group` method on purchase order lines. The purpose of this override is to support grouping on computed fields that are not stored in the database such as `amount_to_invoice_at_date (Amount)`, `qty_received_at_date (Received)`.

When `_read_group_for_accrual` is executed, it delegates grouping for non-computed fields to the parent `_read_group` implementation, as shown at [1].

The parent method returns results in `res` similar to: 
```
[(datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0), 1.0, 10.0, 1)]
```
During iteration over res at [2], the code uses `group[0]` as the grouping key. In this example, group[0] is `datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0)`, which represents the granularity date
(e.g., the first day of the month when grouping by month).

However, `records_by_group` is keyed by the actual purchase order line order dates rather than the granularity dates returned by `_read_group`. For example:
```
{datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 12, 0, 0): purchase.order.line(1,)}
```

As a result, the lookup performed using the granularity date (`datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0))` does not find a matching entry in `records_by_group`. Consequently, records falls back to an empty `purchase.order.line()` recordset.

Later, at [3], the aggregation logic computes totals using this empty recordset. Since the required fields are evaluated on an empty set of records, the aggregated values are computed as zero.

This ultimately causes the method to return a total value of zero
[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L9-L24 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L40-L42 
[3]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L44-L47

## Solution:
The issue can be resolved by grouping records using the same date granularity specified in the groupby, rather than using the field values.

By aligning the grouping logic with the granularity returned by `_read_group` (for example, grouping by the first day of the month when using monthly grouping ), the keys in `records_by_group` match the values returned in `res`. As a result, the corresponding records are correctly retrieved during aggregation.

This ensures that the aggregation is performed on the appropriate purchase order lines instead of an empty recordset, allowing the computed totals to be calculated correctly.

[opw-6261225](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6261225)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120369

Issue
-----
International deliveries for fractions of items (eg 500g of a product sold by kg) are rejected by Sendcloud.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Setup Sendcloud
	- Fedex international
- Create a product
	- weight: 1kg
	- valid hs code
- Create a contact (outside EU if the company is in EU)
- Deliver 0.5 of the product to the contact

> Error "... parcel not returned from Sendcloud"

Cause
-----
Sendcloud returns he folloing error:

> "The total weight for declared items exceeds the total weight set for the shipment."

This is because the `weight` set on the shipment

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L449-L464

corresponds to the weight of the package, whereas the weight set on the description of the product in `parcel_items` corresponds to the weight of one "full" unit of the product.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L327-L335

We cannot change the quantity in `parcel_items` to match the actual delivered one because the field should be an integer.

https://sendcloud.dev/api/v2/parcels/create-a-parcel-or-parcels#body-one-of-0-parcel-parcel-items-items-quantity

The price is also off, because it gets taken from the `move_line`, so it reflects the price of the actual quantity and not a "full" item.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/208a8a6a5adb8ec1f2710453c2ee3b54c55a9f1e/addons/stock_delivery/models/delivery_carrier.py#L235

Note that this issue is common to **all UoM types**.

Solution
-----
Since we cannot change the quantity, we can instead adapt the description and weight sent in `parcel_items`. For example, sending 300g of sugar, we would send
- description: "Sugar (0.3 kg)"
- weight: "0.300"

-----
Ticket:
opw-6346330

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124686

### Issue:

Attributes of DoctoRelacionado node in the XML display an incorrect value because the exchange rate difference entry distorts the calculation, even though the invoice was fully settled.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ntQny0o8bkkfYtY5ZNBK0Yq7Rq0I-yfz/view

### Fix:
Sorting partials by "not exchange_move_id" first broke the chronological order whenever the invoice/payment partial itself carried an exchange difference (e.g. a foreign currency payment settled at another rate). This made the residual-chain algorithm consume the credit note's "other_residual" on the wrong payment, so ImpSaldoAnt/ImpPagado/ ImpSaldoInsoluto in the payment CFDI's DoctoRelacionado stayed wrong even though the invoice was fully paid.

Populate the exchange move mapping in a separate first pass and sort the partials purely by date/id, so credit notes are always deducted from the correct payment.

task-id:[6363092](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6363092)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124882

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

Steps to reproduce:
- Set the database language to Spanish (Latin America).
- Create a customer invoice, confirm it and send it to the SII.
- Print it using Print > Invoice PDF copy (Chile).
- Scroll to the CEDIBLE section at the bottom of the PDF.

Cause of the issue:
The CEDIBLE footer is merged into l10n_cl.report_invoice_document, which account.report_invoice (odoo/addons/l10n_cl/views/report_invoice.xml) renders with t-lang set to the invoice partner's lang, not the database/user language. The disclaimer text was hardcoded in English and relied on the regular translation to be shown in Spanish, so as
soon as the partner's lang field isn't Spanish, the translation lookup falls back to the untranslated English source, regardless of the database language.

Solution:
This disclaimer is boilerplate mandated by Chilean law: it must always be printed in Spanish, independently of the invoice partner's or current user's language. The same template already follows that rule a few lines above for the SII stamp block ("Timbre Electrónico SII..."), which is hardcoded in Spanish instead of relying on translation.

opw-6390207

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124916

From the cart, it is possible to increase the amount ordered of a rental product that synchronizes shifts depending on a specific service

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install website_sale_renting_planning module
2. Go to Rental > Products and create a new product "test" with Sales enabled, Product Type "Service", Plan Services enabled as "Developer", in the Sales tab, enable Is Published and in the Rental prices tab, create a pricing for Daily period
3. In the General Information tab, click on the internal link to "Developer"
4. Enable Sync Shifts and Rental Orders
5. Go to the eCommerce website and search for product "test"
6. Add as much product "test" to the cart as possible (the quantity is limited)
7. Open the cart
8. You can increase the amount of the product regardless of its availability

Issue:
We don't check the renting availabilities to limit the maximum quantity of the product

Solution:
Check that the new quantity of the product is available in `_verify_updated_quantity` for the specified dates. We also need to check the availability of the product when we modify the rental dates

opw-6274035

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123056

[`_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed`] was called with self instead of slip. However, the method expects a payslip record from its caller, [`_compute_issues`].

This typo was introduced in:
odoo/enterprise@07201466e54f28c6d295d63b908e9a65e39f4862

```py
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py(1913)_compute_issues()
-> issues = generate_issue(slip, context)
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py(235)_issue_mx_warnings()
-> if not slip.company_id.l10n_mx_curp and self._l10n_mx_is_curp_needed():
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py(322)_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed()
-> not self.company_id.partner_id.is_company
  /home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/fields.py(1726)__get__()
-> record.ensure_one()
> /home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/models.py(5344)ensure_one()
-> raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
```
This causes module installation to fail with:
```py
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/tools/convert.py", line 779, in convert_csv_import
    raise Exception(env._(
Exception: Module loading l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi failed: file l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/data/hr.employee.type.csv could not be processed:
Ocurrió un error desconocido durante la importación: <class 'ValueError'>: Expected singleton: res.partner(7, 9)
```

upg-4468049

[`_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed`]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py#L235
[`_compute_issues`]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/saas-19.3/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1904-L1913

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

### 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

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

### Issue:

Attributes of DoctoRelacionado node in the XML display an incorrect value because the exchange rate difference entry distorts the calculation, even though the invoice was fully settled.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ntQny0o8bkkfYtY5ZNBK0Yq7Rq0I-yfz/view

### Fix:
Sorting partials by "not exchange_move_id" first broke the chronological order whenever the invoice/payment partial itself carried an exchange difference (e.g. a foreign currency payment settled at another rate). This made the residual-chain algorithm consume the credit note's "other_residual" on the wrong payment, so ImpSaldoAnt/ImpPagado/ ImpSaldoInsoluto in the payment CFDI's DoctoRelacionado stayed wrong even though the invoice was fully paid.

Populate the exchange move mapping in a separate first pass and sort the partials purely by date/id, so credit notes are always deducted from the correct payment.

task-id:[6363092](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6363092)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124882

### 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#124862
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124097

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Install `documents_hr` and `web_studio` with demo data.
2. Add `document_count` to the Employees list view via Studio.
3. Create a second company with an employee, enable multi-company.
4. Open Employees list, click **All** in the search panel.

Issues:
------
Issue 1:
```python
File "/home/odoo/odoo/enterprise/documents_hr/models/hr_employee.py", line 25, in _compute_document_count
    if not self.company_id.documents_hr_settings:
File "/home/odoo/odoo/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1429, in __get__
    record.ensure_one()
File "/home/odoo/odoo/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5640, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: res.company(1, 2)
```

Issue 2:
```python
  File "/home/odoo/odoo/enterprise/documents_hr/models/hr_employee.py", line 31, in _compute_document_count
    ('partner_id', '=', self.work_contact_id.id)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo/community/odoo/orm/fields_misc.py", line 117, in __get__
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % record)
ValueError: Expected singleton: res.partner(9, 8, 7)
```
Cause:
---------
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/38674448e387159d28f98c1678856fcaf5f7f52e/documents_hr/models/hr_employee.py#L23-L48
1. The document count computation assumes all employees belong to the same company by directly accessing `self.company_id.documents_hr_settings`. In a multi-company environment, `self` may contain employees from different companies, making self.company_id a multi-recordset and triggering a singleton error.

2. Similarly, when `documents_hr_settings` is disabled, the fallback computation accesses `self.work_contact_id` on a multi-recordset, causing another singleton error.

Solution:
-----------
Split the employees based on whether `documents_hr_settings` is enabled and compute each group separately.
Additionally, use the current employee's `work_contact_id` in the fallback computation to avoid singleton error.

**NOTE:**
This has been resolved from saas-19.4 onward with this improvement [commit](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/d018d8205300b434728129e199ae048cefbaa296).

opw-6351141

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124826

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

# How to reproduce
For an employee with full attendances for april and may:
- Create payslip for the month of April, Compute Sheet & Confirm
- Create a Time off request for that employee ffrom the 1st of April to the 10th of April, Approve & Validate
> Since the April payroll is closed, you need to defer the Time Off
- Report to Next Month
- Create payslip for the month of May
> The deffered time off should be there
- Compute Sheet & Confirm
- Create a Time off request for that employee for the 3rd of May, Approve & Validate
> Again, the May payroll is closed, so you need to defer the Time Off

# The issue
You cannot defer the time off because "There is no work entries linked to this time off to report"

# The cause
When deferring a time off, we call `action_report_to_next_month` that will look for work entries generated during the leave period to defer :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/f93882555864a1f0a2a3e3863780096c78923bfa/hr_payroll_holidays/models/hr_leave.py#L94-L101

The issue is that, since [this commit], we search for work entries that are not leaves and the first deferring we did transformed the work entries at the start of may into leaves.

[this commit]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/13ce65b8ca61f9a825f2876e2727cddfae83f894

opw-6318809

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123263

### Issue:

Attributes of DoctoRelacionado node in the XML display an incorrect value because the exchange rate difference entry distorts the calculation, even though the invoice was fully settled.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ntQny0o8bkkfYtY5ZNBK0Yq7Rq0I-yfz/view

### Fix:
Sorting partials by "not exchange_move_id" first broke the chronological order whenever the invoice/payment partial itself carried an exchange difference (e.g. a foreign currency payment settled at another rate). This made the residual-chain algorithm consume the credit note's "other_residual" on the wrong payment, so ImpSaldoAnt/ImpPagado/ ImpSaldoInsoluto in the payment CFDI's DoctoRelacionado stayed wrong even though the invoice was fully paid.

Populate the exchange move mapping in a separate first pass and sort the partials purely by date/id, so credit notes are always deducted from the correct payment.

task-id:[6363092](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6363092)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124882

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Install Timesheets.
2. Create a new employee with a fully fixed working schedule (40h/week).
3. Open Timesheets > All Timesheets and create a new timesheet in the past week for this employee (e.g. 8 hours).
4. Observe the overtime indicator for the employee (it shows 32 hrs)
   (Click the left arrow to display it).
5. Change the timesheet encoding unit to "Days / Half-Days".
6. Return to Timesheets and observe the overtime indicator (it now correctly shows 4 days).
7. Install a language other than English (e.g. French).
8. Return to Timesheets and observe the overtime indicator again.

Issue:
--------
The remaining time value changes unexpectedly and displays 32 hours instead of 4 days.

Cause:
---------
In `get_timesheet_and_working_hours_for_employees`, the code determines whether the timesheet UoM is expressed in days by comparing the UoM name with the string `"days"`.

Since UoM names are translatable, this comparison becomes invalid when the user language changes (e.g. `"jours"` in French), causing the logic to skip the day conversion and return values in hours instead.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c48290e90fdeadf4f9ca8c44b035e601e7ed380a/timesheet_grid/models/hr_employee.py#L165-L169

Solution:
-----------
Compare the timesheet UoM record with the day UoM record directly instead of relying on translated string values.


see commit: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/5fbf194c5056566453a124812fd2614edfe19a82

opw-6279133

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120595

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
1. Install Timesheets.
2. Create a new employee with a fully fixed working schedule (40h/week).
3. Open Timesheets > All Timesheets and create a new timesheet in the past week for this employee (e.g. 8 hours).
4. Observe the overtime indicator for the employee (it shows 32 hrs)
   (Click the left arrow to display it).
5. Change the timesheet encoding unit to "Days / Half-Days".
6. Return to Timesheets and observe the overtime indicator (it now correctly shows 4 days).
7. Install a language other than English (e.g. French).
8. Return to Timesheets and observe the overtime indicator again.

Issue:
--------
The remaining time value changes unexpectedly and displays 32 hours instead of 4 days.

Cause:
---------
In `get_timesheet_and_working_hours_for_employees`, the code determines whether the timesheet UoM is expressed in days by comparing the UoM name with the string `"days"`.

Since UoM names are translatable, this comparison becomes invalid when the user language changes (e.g. `"jours"` in French), causing the logic to skip the day conversion and return values in hours instead.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c48290e90fdeadf4f9ca8c44b035e601e7ed380a/timesheet_grid/models/hr_employee.py#L165-L169

Solution:
-----------
Compare the timesheet UoM record with the day UoM record directly instead of relying on translated string values.


see commit: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/5fbf194c5056566453a124812fd2614edfe19a82

opw-6279133

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120595

**Issue**
Changing the `partner_id` of an outgoing rental transfer could reset its destination location to the partner customer location instead of the rental location.

**Steps to reproduce**
- Enable Rental Transfers from Rental Configuration.
- Create a Sales Order for a rental product.
- Open the related delivery transfer.
- Using Studio, make the Destination Location field visible. -> Current destination location is: Partner/Customer/Rental
- Change the delivery address -> The destination location become: Partner/Customer

**Cause**
Changing the delivery address (i.e: the partner_id) triggers `_compute_location_id`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/85372b625a80ab50fe2d8a6bce49a890b2bf1665/addons/stock/models/stock_picking.py#L949-L950 
Since commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8c90fc1fd336ee872fd67d8d72473e4f6c55b2e0, not only draft picking are recomputed. As a result, `location_dest_id` is set as `picking.partner_id.property_stock_customer` https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/85372b625a80ab50fe2d8a6bce49a890b2bf1665/addons/stock/models/stock_picking.py#L959-L961 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/85372b625a80ab50fe2d8a6bce49a890b2bf1665/addons/stock/models/stock_picking.py#L963 
Regardless whether we are in rental setup

opw-6237495

Steps to reproduce:
- Configure a preparation display on a POS config with a product category
- Place an order and leave it in a non-final stage
- Keep the session open past midnight

Issue:
The kanban order-count badge drops the order once its create_date falls behind "today", while the preparation screen still lists it. The same divergence makes the badge keep counting an order that a "Reset" already removed from the screen.

_compute_order_count() scoped its search on pos_config_id and create_date >= today, whereas the screen is built by get_preparation_display_order() from _get_open_orders_in_display() and _get_stageless_orders_in_display(), which have no date filter and instead bound the set by the order stage `done` flag and the session state. An order open across midnight is therefore in the screen set but not in the badge set. Conversely reset() marks the current stage done, which drops the order from the screen set, but the badge only skipped orders whose latest stage is the final stage, so an order reset while still in the first stage stayed counted.

opw-6414302

Steps to reproduce:
- set the company currency to XCG
- set the PoS sales journal currency and the PoS pricelist currency to USD
- configure a XCG <-> USD rate
- create a customer without any outstanding balance
- open the PoS, create an order of USD 100 and validate it with the Customer Account (Pay Later) payment method
- open the Customers screen and look at the Total Due of that customer

Issue:
The Total Due shows about USD 55.56, i.e. the amount converted once too many, instead of the expected USD 100.

Cause:
get_total_due() sums two amounts that are not expressed in the same currency before converting them. partner.total_due comes from the accounting entries, it is the sum of account.move.line.amount_residual and is therefore in company currency, while total_settled is the sum of pos.payment.amount of the still open sessions, which is in the currency of the order, so the PoS one. The addition is done first and the result is then converted from the company currency to the PoS one, so the pay later payments end up converted a second time.

opw-6403320

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install the `l10n_pl_reports` module and switch to a `PL Company`.
- Create and confirm a vendor bill with a `Bill Reference` and `Taxes`.
- Navigate to Accounting > Reporting > Tax Report and select `This Month`.
- From the dropdown, click `JPK` > `Export XML`.
- Open the generated XML file and observe the `DowodZakupu` field.

**Observation:**
`DowodZakupu` contains the vendor `Bill Number` even 
when a `Bill Reference` is set.

**Root Cause:**
At [1], `DowodZakupu` is populated only with the vendor `Bill number`(`move_name`) 
instead of using the `Bill reference`(`ref`) when available.

**Fix:**
This commit ensures `DowodZakupu` contains the `Bill Reference`
when it is available in JPK exports.

**Reference:**
https://www.podatki.gov.pl/media/eqrn3dey/broszura-jpk_vat-z-deklaracj%C4%85-od-1-lutego-2026-r-en.pdf (page 41)

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4b0404058b280136f6865090562f95e18d4d7e0b/l10n_pl_reports/data/jpk_export_templates.xml#L208

opw-6299827