Steps to Reproduce:

- Go to Settings > Translations > Languages and select your active language.
- Change the Time Format to a 13:00:00 (24-hour)
- Click on the Attendance systray icon in the top navbar and Check In.
- Notice that the recorded time still displays in a 12-hour format.

Cause:

- The attendance popup doesn't enforce a strict 12-hour or 24-hour rule. Because of this missing rule, your web browser just uses your computer's default time settings. As a result, Odoo's actual language and time settings are completely ignored.

Fix:

- Replaced the browser-based formatting with the existing formatting utilities.
- Used is24HourFormat() to determine whether the active time format uses a 12-hour or 24-hour clock.

Solution:
- Dynamically selected the display format using:
    - HH:mm for 24-hour format
    - hh:mm a for 12-hour format
- Applied the selected format consistently for both check-in and check-out times so the systray now correctly follows the configured language time format.

task-6120540

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259918

## Current behavior:
Clicking on the Late activity for Lot/Serial in the notification systray doesn't apply the Late activities filter.

## Expected behavior:
Clicking on the Late activity for Lot/Serial in the notification systray should apply the Late activities filter.

## Steps to reproduce:
1. Install Inventory (stock) module, make sure to enable Lots & Serial Numbers in Inventory > Traceability
2. Create some new Lots / Serial numbers
3. Add some Activities with Due Date before today
4. Observe that the Clock icon on systray will count up, showing the number of activities that are late, for today and for future
5. Click on the Late activities (e.g. 2 Late) should only show the 2 late activities. Instead, no filter is applied, thus showing all the Lots / Serial numbers in the inventory

## Cause of the issue:
Missing filters for Late, Today and Future activities in the stock_lot_views.xml

## Fix:
Added 3 filters for Late, Today and Future activities

opw-6332560

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278165
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272735

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Install l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock
- Run Test_sale_mrp_kit_bom_cogs

Problem:
```self.assertAlmostEqual(stock_out_aml.credit, 1.53, msg="Should not include the value of consumable component")
AssertionError: 3.07 != 1.53 within 7 places (1.5399999999999998 difference) : Should not include the value of consumable component
```
The test delivered 1 whole unit of every component of Kit A regardless of the fractional quantity actually needed to produce a single kit (0.34/0.14/0.2 units for Component A/B/BB respectively). This went unnoticed under the default invoice_policy 'order', since qty_delivered never drives the invoiced quantity in that case.

l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock forces invoice_policy to 'delivery' for storable products that have no explicit company_id, which is the case for the products created in this test. With invoice_policy 'delivery', _compute_kit_quantities() correctly reads the over-delivered components as enough stock to form 2 complete kits (min ratio 2.94, floored to 2) instead of 1, doubling the invoiced quantity and the resulting COGS (3.07 instead of 1.53).

runbot-243633

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277519

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Run the product module test suite on a loaded/slow CI runner
- Observe test_get_first_possible_combination occasionally failing

Problem:
test_get_first_possible_combination asserts that
_get_first_possible_combination() completes in under 0.5 seconds on a template with 10 attributes x 50 values and exclusion rules. On a busy runner (Testing country uk build) it took 0.587s and the test failed with `0.5868358612060547 not less than 0.5`, even though the returned combination was correct. The 0.5s threshold is an arbitrary sanity check meant to catch a gross algorithmic regression (e.g. loss of early pruning of invalid combinations), not a strict performance SLA, so it is too tight to survive normal CI load variance.

Solution:
Raise the threshold to 2 seconds, keeping enough margin to absorb CI load variance while still catching a real performance regression, which would take far longer than the current computation.

runbot-243606

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277986

**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#278656
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267726

[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#278777
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274731

The actions menu is cluttered with redundant presence actions. To streamline the UI, the presence actions have been removed from the root menu and are now kept exclusively within the "Presence Control" submenu.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Navigate to an Employee record.
2. Open the Actions menu.
3. Observe that "Set Present", "Set Absent", "Send SMS", and "Create a Time Off" appear in the root menu AND in the "Presence Control" submenu.

Furthermore, invoking these actions from the Presence Control submenu did not pass the correct record context. Because of this, dialogs like "Create a Time Off" failed to automatically prefill with the currently selected employee's data, disrupting the workflow.

1. Navigate to an Employee record.
2. Open the Actions menu and hover over the "Presence Control" submenu.
3. Click "Create a Time Off".
4. Observe that the employee field in the dialog is blank instead of prefilling with the current employee.

task-6384993

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

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#278737
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277813

# How to reproduce
- Have two language in the db
- Create an e-Commerce category
- Have a different translation for each language for that category's name
- Copy the link to that category's name in one language (Should be something like /shop/category/name-x)
- Have two websites, each with a different default language
- Create a link to the shop category in each website.
> ! The link must be the exact same
> You can put it in the header menu for simplicity
- Open the website editor
- Do 2 or 3 times :
    - click on the category link and switch website

# The issue
A traceback is displayed

# Cause
This manipulation will make us enter an infinite redirect scenario described here :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f8741728294a5147c7d2427d9997738096386262/addons/website/static/src/client_actions/website_preview/website_builder_action.js#L371-L384

The problem is that this commit introduced an assignation to `iframe.contentDocument.body` before the patch :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/89994eb7a54ca606bab26b6d579d03e86c11ba60

But in our case, iframe.contentDocument is null, so it throws an error before the patch can be applied

opw-6322115

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276634

# 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271547

sale_loyalty filters amount_type == 'fixed' taxes when building discountable_per_tax in all three helpers: _discountable_order , _discountable_cheapest, _discountable_specific, so fixed taxes stay only on the original product line and are not transferred onto the discount reward line.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
                                            
  pos_loyalty has the equivalent filter on _getDiscountableOnOrder (pos_order.js:962, added in commit 68d35232dd5) but not on the two sibling methods. As a result, when a promotion program uses discount_applicability='cheapest' or 'specific', the fixed tax is copied onto the reward line's tax_ids and because the reward line carries a negative price its fixed-tax contribution cancels the same tax on the original product line, understating the order total.                                                                                                                                                   
   
  This change ports the filter expression from _getDiscountableOnOrder to _getDiscountableOnCheapest and _getDiscountableOnSpecific, preserving the e-wallet / gift-card carve-out so those programs can still consume the full amount. 



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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267020
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#261370

On a production-sized database the `hr.leave.attendance.report` SQL
view took over three hours to run. This caused a significant load on the
upgrade platform when processing databases that have a large number of
`hr.employee` records. Specifically, when running `test_mock_crawl` and
mocking the `Attendances > Reporting > Time Off Ledger` menu.

PostgreSQL mis-estimated the row counts produced by the view:

- The public-holiday check combined an `OR` with a function-wrapped
  `BETWEEN` (`... AT TIME ZONE ... ::date`), which the planner cannot
  estimate; it predicted ~1 surviving row (actual: 29.4M) and chose
  nested loops that re-aggregated whole tables once per output row.
- The attendance sub-query aggregated the entire `hr_attendance`
  table with no date bound, and was re-executed per output row.
- The working schedule was resolved with a per-(employee, day)
  `LIMIT 1` lookup into `hr_version` (29.4M index probes).

Rewrite the view as a set of CTEs: every heavy table is scanned once,
joins use plain equality keys (hash-joinable), public holidays are
pre-expanded so their exclusion stays an anti-join, the attendance
aggregate is bounded to the report window, and hr_version is resolved
by expanding each version over the days it covers. None of the CTEs
are explicitly materialized: left to its own heuristic, PostgreSQL
inlines a CTE referenced only once as a plain subquery and materializes
the ones referenced more than once, which benchmarked faster than
forcing materialization everywhere.

This rewrites the body of the SQL view only: no schema change, no new
field, no index, no migration. The report output is unchanged.

Measured with EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) on the same database:

  | metric         | before        | after    | factor |
  |----------------|---------------|----------|--------|
  | execution time | 11 852 235 ms | 1 834 ms | ~6500x |
  | buffer hits    | 115 311 556   | 71 890   | ~1600x |

upg-4288902

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278690
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266108

When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process.

The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding.

Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278599
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869

Steps to Reproduce:

- Go to Settings > Translations > Languages and select your active language.
- Change the Time Format to a 13:00:00 (24-hour)
- Click on the Attendance systray icon in the top navbar and Check In.
- Notice that the recorded time still displays in a 12-hour format.

Cause:

- The attendance popup doesn't enforce a strict 12-hour or 24-hour rule. Because of this missing rule, your web browser just uses your computer's default time settings. As a result, Odoo's actual language and time settings are completely ignored.

Fix:

- Replaced the browser-based formatting with the existing formatting utilities.
- Used is24HourFormat() to determine whether the active time format uses a 12-hour or 24-hour clock.

Solution:
- Dynamically selected the display format using:
    - HH:mm for 24-hour format
    - hh:mm a for 12-hour format
- Applied the selected format consistently for both check-in and check-out times so the systray now correctly follows the configured language time format.

task-6120540

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259918

## Issue
In Attendances > Management, negative overtimes do not appear in the list, even if they need approval from a manager.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Attendances* (`hr_attendance`)
2. In Settings:
    - Toggle *Attendances from Backend*
    - Toggle *Absence Management*
    - Toggle *Display Extra Hours*
    - Set *Extra Hours Validation* to *Approved by Manager*
3. On an Employee E:
    - Overtime Ruleset: Default Ruleset
4. In Attendances, create an attendance for employee E on a day where they are expected to work. The attendance should be shorter than a full day of work (e.g., from 9:00am to 11:00am, which would be -6 hours of overtime if 8 hors are expected).
5. Navigate to Attendances > Management
6. **The attendance created in Step 4 does not appear, even though it should be approved by a manager.**

## Cause
The domain for the `hr_attendance_management_action` is the following:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/22a94663e4c1672366b7a614943cef843ced3503/addons/hr_attendance/views/hr_attendance_view.xml#L439

The `overtime_hours > 0` condition was added by https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/e5067262174725466056e9a6c530439b4845c19b with the intent to remove attendance records with zero extra hours. Instead, it removes all records with less than zero extra hours.

opw-6372360

## Current behavior:
Clicking on the Late activity for Lot/Serial in the notification systray doesn't apply the Late activities filter.

## Expected behavior:
Clicking on the Late activity for Lot/Serial in the notification systray should apply the Late activities filter.

## Steps to reproduce:
1. Install Inventory (stock) module, make sure to enable Lots & Serial Numbers in Inventory > Traceability
2. Create some new Lots / Serial numbers
3. Add some Activities with Due Date before today
4. Observe that the Clock icon on systray will count up, showing the number of activities that are late, for today and for future
5. Click on the Late activities (e.g. 2 Late) should only show the 2 late activities. Instead, no filter is applied, thus showing all the Lots / Serial numbers in the inventory

## Cause of the issue:
Missing filters for Late, Today and Future activities in the stock_lot_views.xml

## Fix:
Added 3 filters for Late, Today and Future activities

opw-6332560

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278165
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272735

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Install l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock
- Run Test_sale_mrp_kit_bom_cogs

Problem:
```self.assertAlmostEqual(stock_out_aml.credit, 1.53, msg="Should not include the value of consumable component")
AssertionError: 3.07 != 1.53 within 7 places (1.5399999999999998 difference) : Should not include the value of consumable component
```
The test delivered 1 whole unit of every component of Kit A regardless of the fractional quantity actually needed to produce a single kit (0.34/0.14/0.2 units for Component A/B/BB respectively). This went unnoticed under the default invoice_policy 'order', since qty_delivered never drives the invoiced quantity in that case.

l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock forces invoice_policy to 'delivery' for storable products that have no explicit company_id, which is the case for the products created in this test. With invoice_policy 'delivery', _compute_kit_quantities() correctly reads the over-delivered components as enough stock to form 2 complete kits (min ratio 2.94, floored to 2) instead of 1, doubling the invoiced quantity and the resulting COGS (3.07 instead of 1.53).

runbot-243633

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277519

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Run the product module test suite on a loaded/slow CI runner
- Observe test_get_first_possible_combination occasionally failing

Problem:
test_get_first_possible_combination asserts that
_get_first_possible_combination() completes in under 0.5 seconds on a template with 10 attributes x 50 values and exclusion rules. On a busy runner (Testing country uk build) it took 0.587s and the test failed with `0.5868358612060547 not less than 0.5`, even though the returned combination was correct. The 0.5s threshold is an arbitrary sanity check meant to catch a gross algorithmic regression (e.g. loss of early pruning of invalid combinations), not a strict performance SLA, so it is too tight to survive normal CI load variance.

Solution:
Raise the threshold to 2 seconds, keeping enough margin to absorb CI load variance while still catching a real performance regression, which would take far longer than the current computation.

runbot-243606

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277986

Currently, an error occurs when grouping invoice lines by tax.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `Accounting` module.
 - Go to `Accounting` > `Customers` > `Invoices` and `create an invoice`.
 - Add an `invoice line`, set a `price`, and select an `account`.
 - Go to `Accounting` > `Configuration` > `Chart of Accounts`, open the account used on 
   the invoice line, and clear its `Code` field.
 - Return to the `invoice`, click `Action` > `(Un)Group lines by tax`.

`ValueError: TypeError('sequence item 1: expected str instance, bool found') while evaluating`
`'if records:\n records.action_group_ungroup_lines_by_tax()'`


After this [recent commit], account codes became optional and can be removed. As a result, 
when a user adds an account with no code to an invoice line and groups the lines by the same 
tax, it creates the grouped line from here [1]. Then, when it gets the account code from the 
grouped line to prepare the name, the code is False, which raises the error [2].

This commit ensures that the grouped line name is built using filter(None, ...), which removes 
None and other falsy values, so that the account code is included if it exists; otherwise, 
it is not included.

[recent commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c3313b336b9f1305c363097745926f2bdf61e277

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/92ced215895d027a2b5606dbecbf3eb96b9dcd10/addons/account_edi_ubl_cii/models/account_move.py#L156-L158

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/92ced215895d027a2b5606dbecbf3eb96b9dcd10/addons/account_edi_ubl_cii/models/account_move.py#L189-L193

sentry-7598941609

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

When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process.

The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding.

Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278599
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869

**Issue**:
Even if the currency rate is changed on the invoice, the today currency rate is used
while generating stock landed cost.

**Steps to reproduce**:
- Enable two currencies (ex: Dollar and Euro)
- Enable Landed Costs on the settings
- Create a service product
- Create a bill for that product for 100 dollar and click the Landed Costs check box
- Change the currency rating (ex: 1 USD = 0.5 euro) and confirm the bill
- Click on "Create Landed Costs"
-> The cost is not 200

**Cause**:
While creating the landed cost:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e906eb23d698061f146ba67aae420eb7bb5e8a68/addons/stock_landed_costs/models/account_move.py#L21
it uses `_convert` from the currency:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e906eb23d698061f146ba67aae420eb7bb5e8a68/addons/stock_landed_costs/models/account_move.py#L35
which gets the `conversion_rate` defined on the currency, regardless whether `is_invoicing` is true:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e906eb23d698061f146ba67aae420eb7bb5e8a68/odoo/addons/base/models/res_currency.py#L294
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e906eb23d698061f146ba67aae420eb7bb5e8a68/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L6350-L6351

**Solution**
It is safe to replace the `convert` calls by the `currency_rate` of the `Account.move.line` since:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e906eb23d698061f146ba67aae420eb7bb5e8a68/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py#L735-L747
`currency_rate` will be set as `_get_conversion_rate` when not invoicing.
Also add rounding since `_convert` is called with `round=True` by default.

opw-6047031

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#256394

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Run the product module test suite on a loaded/slow CI runner
- Observe test_get_first_possible_combination occasionally failing

Problem:
test_get_first_possible_combination asserts that
_get_first_possible_combination() completes in under 0.5 seconds on a template with 10 attributes x 50 values and exclusion rules. On a busy runner (Testing country uk build) it took 0.587s and the test failed with `0.5868358612060547 not less than 0.5`, even though the returned combination was correct. The 0.5s threshold is an arbitrary sanity check meant to catch a gross algorithmic regression (e.g. loss of early pruning of invalid combinations), not a strict performance SLA, so it is too tight to survive normal CI load variance.

Solution:
Raise the threshold to 2 seconds, keeping enough margin to absorb CI load variance while still catching a real performance regression, which would take far longer than the current computation.

runbot-243606

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277986

[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

When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process.

The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding.

Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278599
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869

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/odoo#277440

### Issue:
The fix in commit `f0d164d3ab` introduced one cash rounding record per Indian company for new installations, but existing databases were not updated

Indian companies created before that fix still share the old `l10n_in.cash_rounding_in_half_up` record, and moves may be linked to a cash rounding belonging to another company

### Cause:
No migration script was included with the original fix

The script creates a dedicated cash rounding record for each Indian company that does not already have one, reassigns existing moves to the correct record, and migrates the XML ID of the original shared record to the new per-company format

### Steps to reproduce:
- Create a database with `l10n_in` installed before commit `f0d164d3ab`
- Create an invoice and set its Cash Rounding to `Half Up`
- Create a new Indian company (the `Half Up` record is now reassigned to the new company)
- Repeat the previous two steps as many times as desired
- Apply the fix (without the migration script) and upgrade `l10n_in`

Before the fix, invoices from other companies still reference the shared cash rounding record belonging to the last created company

- Apply the migration script and upgrade again

After the fix, each company has its own cash rounding record and existing invoices are reassigned correctly

opw-6318857

Currently, an error occurs when installing the hr_holidays_attendance module.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `hr_attendance` module without demo data.
 - Go to `Attendance` > `Configuration` > `Overtime Rulesets` and open the `Default Ruleset` record.
 - Delete its `linked overtime rules`.
 - Install the `hr_holidays_attendance` module.
 
 **Error:**
```py
Exception: Cannot update missing record 'hr_attendance.hr_attendance_overtime_employee_schedule_rule'

odoo.tools.convert.ParseError: while parsing /home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/data/hr_holidays_attendance_data.xml:7, somewhere inside <record id="hr_attendance.hr_attendance_overtime_employee_schedule_rule" model="hr.attendance.overtime.rule">
            <field name="compensable_as_leave" eval="True"/>
        </record>
```
This error occurs when the user deletes all overtime rules and then installs the hr_holidays_attendance 
module. During installation, the module attempts to update the deleted overtime rule records, 
which raises an error [1].

This commit uses forcecreate="0" to skip updating records if the corresponding overtime 
rules do not exist.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/da0a83761f38ee4a2940015b6c8f7190c310a4a0/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/data/hr_holidays_attendance_data.xml#L7-L12

sentry-7372074675

---
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:**

When rendering floating-point numbers with high decimal accuracy (e.g., UoM quantities set to 10 decimals), the UI can occasionally display a trailing parasitic digit (such as 53000.0000000002 instead of 53000.0000000000).

This commit resolves the issue by backporting the formatting logic from master. The `maxDecDigits` calculation is moved outside the conditionals so it unconditionally caps precision for all numbers. Furthermore, the global significant digit ceiling is reduced from 15 to 14.

This 14-digit ceiling reserves a 1-digit buffer, allowing the newly introduced `formatFixedDecimals` utility to safely run `roundDecimals` on the float. This mathematically sanitizes the trailing corrupted digit before it is ever converted to a string.

opw-6313540

**Current behavior before PR:**
- With Product UoM set to 10 Decimal Accuracy, floats such as 53000 are displayed with a corrupted digit (e.g. 53000.0000000002)

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
- With Product UoM set to 10 Decimal Accuracy, floats such as 53000 are displayed without corrupted digits (e.g. 53000.000000000)

This PR is essentially a backport of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/07da917f6e3319b4acde1029e77f69f1aba314b8 and https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c4e7ba8d8fdfd7b0c442cf834f562ef8cedf019b for numbers.js

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276406
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272940

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install website_forum
- Create a new post on the forum with the admin
- Subscribe to the post notifications using the bell button
- Create a new portal user and give him 5 karma
    (to give him enough rights to answer and comment)
- Connect with the portal user and go to the post
- Create an answer
- Try to comment on your own answer
- AccessError is raised

**Issue:**
Since [1] we check comodel access (in this case `res.partner`) when adding records. Here during the `message_post` the `question_followers` are added manually as `partner_ids` before sending (the logic only relies on the original post subscribers, not on the added comment/reply).

```py
question_followers = self.env['mail.followers'].sudo().search([
    ('res_model', '=', self._name),
    ('res_id', '=', self.parent_id.id),
    ('partner_id', '!=', False),
]).filtered(lambda fol: comment_subtype in fol.subtype_ids).mapped('partner_id')
partner_ids += question_followers.ids
```

As the portal user has no `read` access to the subscribers the message creation fails with a traceback.

**Fix:**
Add `sudo` to the `message_post` call of `post_comment`.

(Also fix a minor display issue in the 'Karma Error' notification)

[1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/aae732957c3c3b3590f5686cfccc0ab264d0b5c9

opw-5318757

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274751

Description of the issue this commit addresses:

When a member of the Invoicing group tries to create a payment trough the L10nPlAccountPaymentRegister wizard, upon clicking "Create Payment", an AccessError is thrown. Invoicing group members should be able to handle payments so this is an issue.

---

Steps to reproduce:

1. Make sure sale_management and l10n_pl_bank_verification are installed.
2. Create a new user with "Invoicing" Accounting group.
3. Create a new sales order with said user (any customer, any product)
4. Confirm the quotations and, from its form view, "Create Invoice".
5. Confirm the invoice and, from its form view, "Pay".
6. Upon clicking "Create Payment", an Access Error is thrown.

---

Desired behavior after this commit is merged:

This commit makes sure an Invoicing group member is able to create the payment withtout AccessErrors being thrown.

---

task-none
feedback from: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/267992

---

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278688
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270008

When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process.

The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding.

Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278599
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869

The `bus_monitoring_service` test "connection considered as lost after failed reconnect attempt" fails about half of the time.

Since [1], the reconnect delay in tests is much smaller. The retry therefore fires while the mock socket is still in the closing state.

`_start` detects that socket and triggers the close event manually to keep the lifecycle consistent. In other cases, the error event will schedule a reconnect but in this case it will never arrive.

The worker is then left with no socket, no listeners and no pending timeout: it never reconnects.

Schedule the reconnection when handling a manually triggered close, since no error event will follow to do it.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/278075

runbot-944578

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#278779

For an MO with component tracked by lot is possible to close it without assigning the lot number even when they are marked for manual consumption.
From the shopfloor this will close the MO that will disappear when it's gone it will throw a user error, without the MO reappearing.

Steps to reproduce
---------------------------
**Issue 1**
1) Create a product "final"
2) Create a product "component" tracked by lot
3) Update the on hand quantity and don't assign a lot number
4) Create a BoM for "final" with "component" as component and manual consumption
5) Create a MO and confirm it
6) Go to shopfloor
7) Set "final" quantity
8) Set "component" quantity
10) Close the MO
-> The MO disappear (leaving a user error)
-> Since the "component" does not have a lot number it should not disappear

**Issue 2**
Same steps as Issue 1 until step 6:
6*) Add "comp" as barcode to the product component
7*) Go to barcode
8*) Open the manufacturing order
9*) Add the quantity to final
10*) Scan "comp"
11*) Scan a non-existent lot number, ex: "12345"
-> It raise the error

Observation
----------------------

**Issue 1**
When clicking on "Closing production" it will call [onClickValidateButton](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L481-L482)() that will lead us to validate,
and validate will [call](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L511) the function [pre_button_mark_done](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L507) in python.

in pre_button_mark_done, we will skip any check on the lot number, since we already have set qty_producing (when setting "final" quantity), 
 it will avoid _set_quantities where a check for lot number is made:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9218d302b0fd56c1854d95d3756c0f5e9c9c8700/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L2235-L2239
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/9218d302b0fd56c1854d95d3756c0f5e9c9c8700/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L2839-L2844
And it will also skip the consumption wizard since it doesn't check for lot number nor allow to set lot numbers:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/35f804995118e6ffe150c9c7a7bad4844bd0e0ed/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1658-L1660
After avoiding both checks we go back to validate.

In validate and we update the variable underValidation which will [trigger the fadeout animation](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L154)
When the [animation ends](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L662-L665),
the call to realValidation will be triggered and will call productionValidation that will send a call to [button_mark_done](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/37b21f93828fae2caec87cfd8413e144751eefc0/mrp_workorder/static/src/mrp_display/mrp_display_record.js#L551)

In button_mark_done, when calling _action_done on the move_lines, we will finally check that there is a lot number, which will trigger an error :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/35f804995118e6ffe150c9c7a7bad4844bd0e0ed/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L664-L669
but because the fadeout animation is already over, the mo will have disappeared, which means we can't correct the userError that has been raised.

**Issue 2**
In barcode when scanning a lot after a product, it will not create a lot but only apply a lot_name :
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/7b57a2927aeb8abf84d0f6acc64a7e9bbc8f608d/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1306-L1311
this cause an issue with the existing condition since it only pass the check if there is a lot, but in this case there only is a lot_name.

When we click on "Produce" in a Mo in barcode, it will call validate, that in this case, will call button_mark_done:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/80aaa507fd2196b90cea724ecab0fa0ed5f13db6/stock_barcode/static/src/components/main.xml#L163
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/80aaa507fd2196b90cea724ecab0fa0ed5f13db6/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L602-L605
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/80aaa507fd2196b90cea724ecab0fa0ed5f13db6/stock_barcode_mrp/static/src/models/barcode_mrp_model.js#L14

opw-6060310

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#257635

---

## Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a service product invoiced on delivered quantities with timesheet tracking (`invoice_policy = 'delivery'`, `service_type = 'timesheet'`).
2. Invoice a Sales Order line using this product for 20h in period A.
3. Create a partial credit note refunding 8h of that invoice, also in period A.
4. In a later, unrelated period B, log 10 new hours on the same SO line.
5. Create Invoice again using "Timesheets Period" set to period B only.

## Issue:
The new invoice for period B (10h) becomes a credit note (`out_refund`) for -2h, instead of a normal invoice, even though the 10h were never billed. Only reproduces if the SO line has any refund from an earlier period.

## Root Cause:
`_recompute_qty_to_invoice()` builds `refund_account_moves` from every refund the SO has ever had, with no date filter. This is used to subtract already invoiced quantity from the current period's delivered quantity (`mapping`), which is correctly scoped to period B. Since `refund_account_moves` isn't scoped, period A's 20h invoice and 8h refund (net 12h) get pulled in again and subtracted from period B's 10h:

```
qty_to_invoice = 10 (period B new hours) - 12 (period A net, wrongly reused) = -2
```

The negative result auto-converts the invoice into a credit note.

## Fix:
Added `invoice_date` filtering to `refund_account_moves`, restricting it to the same `start_date`/`end_date` already used for the delivered-quantity domain. Period A's refund, being outside period B, is no longer counted, so `qty_to_invoice` correctly comes out as 10.

## Result:
Invoicing a new period after an earlier partial refund now produces a correct invoice for the actual new hours, instead of a wrong credit note.

opw : [6373449](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6373449)

Steps to reproduce:
------------------------------------
1. Install Time off module
2. Create New Fully Flexible Employee
3. Click on the Time off smart button
4. Create time off for multiple days (eg. Mon - Friday)

Observation:
------------------------------------
Number of days still shows 1 Days.

Issue:
------------------------------------
Issue occurs because `work_time_per_day_mapped` returns one interval per day for
standard and flexible schedules in multi-day time off requests, so the interval
count correctly matches the number of leave days.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d73e5662a0af7c549008661f743ba5d51f765339/addons/hr_holidays/models/hr_leave.py#L460-L461

However, for fully flexible schedules, it returns a single interval
containing the total hours across all days, causing the leave duration to
always be computed as 1 day regardless of the actual number of days requested.

Solution:
------------------------------------
For fully flexible employees, count the actual calendar days and subtract public
holidays when applicable.

opw-6060552

Routes inherited from product category are not available when on replenish.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Create a new route and allow it on product category
* Create a product category and add the route
* Add the category to a product
* use the repenish button 
-> the category route is not available on the replenishment

Observation:
-------------
When opening replenishment, it will open the view_product_replenish, in that view, it will use allowed_route_ids to allow us to choose a route for this replenishment: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2f25b2a70eca5b4f3c2e1d6c7003b1760afc0ba0/addons/stock/wizard/product_replenish_views.xml#L37 
allowed_route_ids is compute in the mixin with the following domain: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2f25b2a70eca5b4f3c2e1d6c7003b1760afc0ba0/addons/stock/models/stock_replenish_mixin.py#L18-L21 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2f25b2a70eca5b4f3c2e1d6c7003b1760afc0ba0/addons/stock/models/stock_replenish_mixin.py#L25-L31 
this only take into account route from the product and not the ones from the product category. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/deeecf7cd02e7383b591835b0c6495e3ddead0ff/addons/stock/models/stock_location.py#L511

opw-6297308

### Issue:
When importing EDI documents such as Peppol files, Swiss VAT numbers may be formatted or unformatted
When `base_vat` is installed, VAT is stored formatted in Odoo (e.g. `CHE-530.781.296 TVA`)
If the format differs, the matching fails and a new partner is created at each import

### Cause:
`_retrieve_partner` lacked Swiss-specific VAT normalization logic in `_get_country_specific_vat_variants`, causing it to miss formatted variants with language suffixes (`TVA`, `MWST`, `IVA`)

Even when the match succeeded, `_import_ubl_create_missing_customer` still compared VAT strings without stripping `-` and lang suffixes for CH partners, causing a false mismatch and triggering partner creation anyway

### Notes:
The partner match improvement is backported from 18.3: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/f1a5a3d72a26ee471d2ef1d8034136208b2bcebc
The original fix was incomplete — it added `_get_country_specific_vat_variants` but missed the VAT comparison fix in `_import_ubl_create_missing_customer`, allowing the issue to persist after a successful match
`base_vat` is required to get the fix fully working

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `account` and `base_vat`
- Create a Vendor (Name: Test CH Vendor, Country: Switzerland, Tax ID: CHE-530.781.296 TVA)
- Import a [Peppol Bill](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/27202997/CH_bill_to_import.xml) with VAT `CHE530781296TVA`

Before the fix, a new partner is created instead of matching the existing one

opw-6353387

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**
When some stock.picking.type records have stock.picking.batch records, the count_picking_batch displays the correct value, but when the user clicks the button, it shows a different number of records because it is not filtered by the corresponding stock.picking.type.

TODO: We replace the context on the Python side because the same action is used in the menu to go to Inventory / Operations / Jobs / Batch Transfers. I think it is necessary to create a new action to use in the button, different from the one used in the menu, but due to stable policies, we avoid this change.

**Current behavior before PR:**
The records displayed when the user clicks the button do not match the record count indicated on the button.


https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/24f23650-8161-40ec-8177-0a2898004f6f


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
The record count shown on the button matches the records displayed when the user clicks the button and opens the action.

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3c550575-b4fa-40c9-89fc-eeedf66d069d



TT60248
CC: @Tecnativa @pedrobaeza 

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

Issue:
The MyInvois payload computed `cbc:PrepaidAmount` as `amount_total - amount_residual`, treating every reconciled payment as a prepayment. A payment made on or after the invoice date is an ordinary settlement, not a deposit, but the code recognized it as one anyway. The values reported for `PrepaidAmount` were wrong regardless of the invoice date, and for a fully paid invoice this also collapsed `PayableAmount` to 0.00, which LHDN rejects.

Root Cause:
LHDN only considers a reconciled payment a genuine deposit if it was received before the invoice date. The code applied no date condition at all, so any payment reconciled against the invoice was added to `PrepaidAmount` and reduced `PayableAmount` accordingly.

Fix:
Only sum reconciled payment partials whose date is strictly earlier than the invoice date as prepaid, so regular payments are no longer misclassified as deposits. As a safety net, if the valid prepaid sum still covers the full invoice amount (e.g. a full advance payment), reset it to 0 so `PayableAmount` always reflects the full amount_total instead of being reported as 0. Also omit the `PrepaidPayment` node entirely when there is no genuine prepayment, rather than emitting it with a 0.00 amount.

[Task-6404296](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/my-tasks/6404296)

Currently, when a search is made on the website, hybrid_list passes the
search term to autocomplete. Inside the autocomplete function, a search
is performed, then _search_render_results is called with all the results.
The data returned from _search_render_results is then sorted and returned
to hybrid_list where it's paginated.

This means, if the search results in 1000 records, we call
_search_render_results on all of them. This is an expensive function, and
much of it goes to waste if it's not the 50 products shown on the page.

This change sorts and paginates the records inside autocomplete before
running _search_render_results on the subset of 50 records that will
eventually be shown on the current page.

This optimizes the search by making the maximum recordset size
_search_render_results is run on to be 50, down from an unbounded number
scaling with products in the database.

The default cap for the number of search results is 500.

|  | 42 Results | 500 Results (Cap) | 1,000 Results | 35,000 results |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Queries Before | 195 | 1515 | 3191 | memory error |
| Queries After | 195 | 209 | 210 | 251 |
| Time Before | 3.62 | 4.50 | 5.92 | memory error |
| Time After | 3.75 | 2.78 | 1.98 | 2.67 |

Note: The differences in timing can be attributed to the initial query time for `_search_with_fuzzy`

opw-6381030