Issue caused because of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/619d8ce9f31349ed06b11ead4988a4a1d9ca6bdd Steps to reproduce-
Create db with demo and install l10n_in
Create a new company for India (other than IN Company) Go to Settings -> Accounting/Invoice Tab -> Enable Ewaybill

traceback
```py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5385, in ensure_one
    _id, = self._ids
    ^^^^
ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 1, got 0)

During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 273, in __call__
    response = serve_db(request)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 380, in serve_db
    registry = Registry(request.db)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 105, in __new__
    return cls.new(db_name)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 217, in new
    cr.rollback()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/sql_db.py", line 568, in rollback
    with rollbacking:
  File "/home/odoo/.pyenv/versions/3.12.0/lib/python3.12/contextlib.py", line 144, in __exit__
    next(self.gen)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1004, in rollbacking
    self.restore_state()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1067, in restore_state
    self.reset()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 912, in reset
    self._reset_registry_change()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 832, in _reset_registry_change
    registry._setup_models__(cr)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 422, in _setup_models__
    env.invalidate_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 395, in invalidate_all
    self.flush_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 413, in flush_all
    self._recompute_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 406, in _recompute_all
    self[field.model_name]._recompute_field(field)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 6462, in _recompute_field
    field.recompute(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2042, in recompute
    apply_except_missing(self.compute_value, recs)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2012, in apply_except_missing
    func(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2066, in compute_value
    records._compute_field_value(self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py", line 498, in _compute_field_value
    return super()._compute_field_value(field)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 4387, in _compute_field_value
    determine(field.compute, self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 82, in determine
    return needle(*args)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 228, in _compute_document_partners_details
    seller_buyer_details = ewaybill._get_seller_buyer_details()
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 185, in _get_seller_buyer_details
    return move._get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in/models/account_invoice.py", line 629, in _get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party
    self.ensure_one()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5388, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: account.move()
```
In this commit, we resolve the above traceback

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276216

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

**Steps to reproduce:**
Both problem are reproducible on runbot aswell 
but for more clarity (and for empty accounting), 
those steps are on a fresh db with no demo data

Problem 1 : 
- create a new db with stock_account, purchase 
and accountant
- In the companies view, select your company
- in the branch tab, create a branch for your company
- for both the branch and the company, in the settings 
set the valuation as periodic daily

With only the branch company selected:
- create a warehouse for your branch
- create a storable prod with a cost of 10
- validate a receipt for 1 unit of the prod
- open inventory valuation view and check 
that there is variation lines for 10
- open 'scheduled actions' view
- select 'inventory valuation closing' 
- click on 'run manually'

With the main company selected: 
- Open journal items
- click on the journal entry of  any of the move line 
with label 'closing stock variation global for 
company [branch]'
- select the 'other info' tab


Problem 2: 
- create a new db with stock_account, purchase 
and accountant
- create a company 2 
- for both companies, in the settings 
set the valuation as periodic daily

With company 2 selected
- create a warehouse for company 2
- in the settings for fiscal localization set the 
'generic chart of account'
- create a storable product with a cost of 10
- validate a receipt for 1 quantity of the product
- open inventory valuation view and check 
that there is variation lines for 10
- open 'scheduled actions' view
- select 'inventory valuation closing' 
- click on 'run manually'


**Current behavior:**
Problem 1: 
the company of the account move 
is the main company

Problem 2: 
There is a traceback including 
'UserError: Everything is correctly closed'

**Expected behavior:**
Problem 1: 
It should be the branch company

Problem 2: 
Everything is closed in company 1, but 
it shouldn't prevent to generate the entries
for company 2

**Cause of the issue:**
Problem 1: 
Inside _cron_post_stock_valuation
we call action_close_stock_valuation for each company
(if periodic daily or periodic monthly and we're the last 
day of the month)
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b8e5291d103d9f43bd8db6d2dfe708076a57ea37/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L143-L144

Inside action_close_stock_valuation when creating 
the account move we add a context to be sure that 
the move is created for the main company selected 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b8e5291d103d9f43bd8db6d2dfe708076a57ea37/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L72
The fix comes from this PR 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/263828
and was improved starting from 19.1 
to simply add a the company_id on the moves_vals.

But the problem is that this fix failed to consider 
the case where we come from cron because 
in this case self.env.company is the main company 
of the user, which is a problem because  as we iterate 
through the companies we want each account 
move to be created for its own company.
This other PR https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/269152 corrects
this by using self.id instead of self.company.id
but only starting from 19.1.

The fix is essentially a back port of those 2 PR.

Problem 2: 
When you call action_close_stock_valuation from 
_cron_post_stock_valuation for the company 
that has no inventory valuation and thus no 
account move to create we will raise the user
error 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b8e5291d103d9f43bd8db6d2dfe708076a57ea37/addons/stock_account/models/res_company.py#L58-L60
This makes sense if the method was called 
from the inventory valuation view. 
But in our case it's called from cron so we might 
also call it on other companies and therefore we 
don't want to raise an exception if there is no 
account move to create on one of the companies.

opw-6144294

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277969
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275294

The bugfix introduced in https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/01d11a770f89c391f7c6a2c46a3d770d10afb428 made it so that "personal" outgoing mail servers are blocked/ignored from being used in email marketing as dedicated servers.

In doing so, it missed the fact that while in *Email Marketing > Settings*, the "Dedicated Server" picker now correctly ignores personal OMS entries, the selection widget for `mail_server_id` in `view_mail_mass_mailing_form` still let's you manually select a OMS with an owner set. As there is not warning or an explicit error, this can lead to accidental miss configurations on an email marketing campaign, where the selected OMS will be actually ignored by the backend.

To align the changes introduced by the bugfix, we add a search domain to the selection field, so that only OMS with `('owner_user_id', '=', False)` will be presented as a choice.

OPW-6388562

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278918
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278595

Issue caused because of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/619d8ce9f31349ed06b11ead4988a4a1d9ca6bdd Steps to reproduce-
Create db with demo and install l10n_in
Create a new company for India (other than IN Company) Go to Settings -> Accounting/Invoice Tab -> Enable Ewaybill

traceback
```py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5385, in ensure_one
    _id, = self._ids
    ^^^^
ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 1, got 0)

During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 273, in __call__
    response = serve_db(request)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 380, in serve_db
    registry = Registry(request.db)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 105, in __new__
    return cls.new(db_name)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 217, in new
    cr.rollback()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/sql_db.py", line 568, in rollback
    with rollbacking:
  File "/home/odoo/.pyenv/versions/3.12.0/lib/python3.12/contextlib.py", line 144, in __exit__
    next(self.gen)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1004, in rollbacking
    self.restore_state()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1067, in restore_state
    self.reset()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 912, in reset
    self._reset_registry_change()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 832, in _reset_registry_change
    registry._setup_models__(cr)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 422, in _setup_models__
    env.invalidate_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 395, in invalidate_all
    self.flush_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 413, in flush_all
    self._recompute_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 406, in _recompute_all
    self[field.model_name]._recompute_field(field)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 6462, in _recompute_field
    field.recompute(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2042, in recompute
    apply_except_missing(self.compute_value, recs)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2012, in apply_except_missing
    func(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2066, in compute_value
    records._compute_field_value(self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py", line 498, in _compute_field_value
    return super()._compute_field_value(field)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 4387, in _compute_field_value
    determine(field.compute, self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 82, in determine
    return needle(*args)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 228, in _compute_document_partners_details
    seller_buyer_details = ewaybill._get_seller_buyer_details()
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 185, in _get_seller_buyer_details
    return move._get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in/models/account_invoice.py", line 629, in _get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party
    self.ensure_one()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5388, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: account.move()
```
In this commit, we resolve the above traceback

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276216

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

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#279033
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270008

When refunding an order that had a fixed-amount global discount, the refunded total was inflated: e.g. a 65.00 order (80.00 - 15.00 fixed discount) was refunded as 95.00 instead of 65.00. On the refund order `amount_paid` then differed from `amount_total`, so the POS session's closing entry could not balance; `_validate_session` rolled back and no `account.move` was created, leaving the session closed with no accounting.

When a refund is created, the product lines are negated and the discount line is excluded, then `pos_discount` re-applies the global discount to the refund order through `applyDiscount`. For a fixed amount, `reduce_base_lines_to_target_amount` targets an absolute value and does not follow the sign of the (now negative) base, so the discount keeps the sale sign. Percentages scale with the base and are not affected.

Negate the fixed discount amount when the destination order is a refund so it mirrors the negative base. The stored `discount_value` is left unchanged so the auto-resync of the discount stays idempotent.

opw-6400738

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

Issue caused because of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/619d8ce9f31349ed06b11ead4988a4a1d9ca6bdd Steps to reproduce-
Create db with demo and install l10n_in
Create a new company for India (other than IN Company) Go to Settings -> Accounting/Invoice Tab -> Enable Ewaybill

traceback
```py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5385, in ensure_one
    _id, = self._ids
    ^^^^
ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 1, got 0)

During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 273, in __call__
    response = serve_db(request)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 380, in serve_db
    registry = Registry(request.db)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 105, in __new__
    return cls.new(db_name)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 217, in new
    cr.rollback()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/sql_db.py", line 568, in rollback
    with rollbacking:
  File "/home/odoo/.pyenv/versions/3.12.0/lib/python3.12/contextlib.py", line 144, in __exit__
    next(self.gen)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1004, in rollbacking
    self.restore_state()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1067, in restore_state
    self.reset()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 912, in reset
    self._reset_registry_change()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 832, in _reset_registry_change
    registry._setup_models__(cr)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 422, in _setup_models__
    env.invalidate_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 395, in invalidate_all
    self.flush_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 413, in flush_all
    self._recompute_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 406, in _recompute_all
    self[field.model_name]._recompute_field(field)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 6462, in _recompute_field
    field.recompute(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2042, in recompute
    apply_except_missing(self.compute_value, recs)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2012, in apply_except_missing
    func(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2066, in compute_value
    records._compute_field_value(self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py", line 498, in _compute_field_value
    return super()._compute_field_value(field)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 4387, in _compute_field_value
    determine(field.compute, self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 82, in determine
    return needle(*args)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 228, in _compute_document_partners_details
    seller_buyer_details = ewaybill._get_seller_buyer_details()
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 185, in _get_seller_buyer_details
    return move._get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in/models/account_invoice.py", line 629, in _get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party
    self.ensure_one()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5388, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: account.move()
```
In this commit, we resolve the above traceback

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276216

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277656

Version:
--------
- 19.0+

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `mrp` module
- Go to the setting enable `Lots & Serial Numbers` and `Storage Locations`
- Create a storable product tracked by Lots
- Configure a Putaway Rule for the product so it is stored in a
  sub-location
- Create a Bill of Materials for the product with at least one
  component
- Create and confirm a Manufacturing Order
- Increase the production quantity (e.g. using the "Change Production
  Quantity" wizard)
- Click **Generate Lot/Serial Number**
- Click **Produce All**

Issue:
------
Completing the Manufacturing Order raises:

    Invalid Operation
    You need to supply a Lot/Serial Number for product:
    - Product

even though a single lot should be sufficient for a lot-tracked
product.

Cause:
------
When the production quantity is increased, `change_prod_qty()` updates
the finished move's demanded quantity and re-reserves it through
`_update_finished_moves()`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/mrp/wizard/change_production_qty.py#L77

which calls `_action_assign()` on the finished move:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/mrp/wizard/change_production_qty.py#L49

Since finished moves originate from the production location, they
bypass the normal reservation flow:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2070

`_action_assign()` then tries to reuse the move's existing move line,
but the lookup requires `location_dest_id` to still match the move's
generic destination:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2092-L2106

That existing line's `location_dest_id` was already redirected to the
putaway sub-location by the previous `_apply_putaway_strategy()` call
(at MO confirmation), so the lookup no longer matches and a second,
distinct move line is created and appended instead of the first one
being reused:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2170

Later, clicking **Generate Lot/Serial Number** creates a single lot and
stores it on the production order's `lot_producing_ids`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1602

When **Produce All** is clicked, which trigger `button_mark_done()`  it calls
`_post_inventory()`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L2227

which assigns that lot to the finished move through `move.lot_ids`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1925

Since `lot_ids` is declared with `inverse='_set_lot_ids'`, this write
triggers that inverse method:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L192

The current implementation of `_set_lot_ids()` only assigns the lot to
a single available move line, regardless of tracking type:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/154b49ec6be6230989ee4eb420e7f83b681ff520/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L656-L668

Since only one lot is ever generated for a lot-tracked product, only
the first finished move line receives a `lot_id`. The second move line
created after increasing the production quantity is left without one.

When `button_mark_done()` validates the finished move lines, it
detects that one of them still has no lot assigned and raises the
"Invalid Operation" error, even though a single lot is valid for the
entire production of a lot-tracked product.

Fix:
----
`action_generate_serial` produces a single lot for the whole production.
In `_post_inventory()`, right after the generated lot is set on
the finished move, propagate it to any remaining lot-less move lines
of a **lot**-tracked finished move.

---

opw-6366060

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275000

With pos_hr enabled, the cash in/out popup uses the cashier's `work_contact_id` as partner for the `account.bank.statement.line`. When that partner is archived or not part of the limited partner loading, the relation cannot be resolved in the frontend and the statement line is created with `partner_id = False`.

Deleting such a cash move then crashes in `delete_cash_in_out`:

    File ".../point_of_sale/models/pos_session.py", line 1877, in delete_cash_in_out
        action = cashier_name + ': ' + str(amount)
    TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'bool' and 'str'

Steps to reproduce:
- Enable "Multi Employees per Session" (pos_hr) on a PoS config
- Archive the work contact of an employee, or make sure it is not included in the limited partner loading
- Open a session, log in as that employee and register a cash in/out
- As a manager, delete the cash move from the cash move list => Traceback, the cash move cannot be deleted

opw-6389830

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276598

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#278892
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278779

When generating the Sales Report or Session Report with a large number of orders (1000+), the report computation could take several minutes or fail entirely with cursor closed errors. This was mainly caused by multiple inefficient ORM patterns, such as repeated searches inside nested loops and unnecessary recordset instantiations.

This commit optimizes the report generation logic by:
- Avoiding repeated searches inside loops (e.g. account payments per session)
- Using `_search` instead of `search` where only record ids are required
- Grouping and caching session-related records (payments, moves, cash moves)
- Reducing redundant ORM calls and Python-level iterations
- Preserving the exact report output structure and values

The returned data remains unchanged; only record ordering may differ due to optimized iteration and grouping.

As a result, report generation time is significantly reduced and the report can be generated reliably even with very large order counts.

task-5452734

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#241828

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Install a localization that overrides invoice_policy defaults for storable products without an explicit company_id (e.g. l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock, which forces 'delivery' in that case)
- Run TestSaleMRPAngloSaxonValuation.test_sale_mrp_kit_bom_cogs (sale_mrp) or TestAngloSaxonValuation.test_anglo_saxon_cogs_partial_down_payment_credit_note (sale_stock)

Problem:
These tests create their products without setting invoice_policy explicitly, relying on the field's implicit default. l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock's _compute_invoice_policy (https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/4e459417dac809caafea34aa2e487fc3c1f0ce1a/l10n_ke_edi_oscu_stock/models/product.py#L16-L21) forces invoice_policy to 'delivery' for any storable product whose company_id is not set, which is the case for products created in these test fixtures.

Once invoice_policy becomes 'delivery', invoiced quantities are driven by qty_delivered instead of the ordered quantity, which the affected tests never account for (some deliver an arbitrary quantity instead of the exact BoM demand, others never validate a delivery at all), causing wrong COGS amounts or wrongly invoiced quantities as soon as such a localization is installed alongside these modules.

Solution:
Pin invoice_policy to 'order' explicitly wherever these test fixtures create their products, so the test outcome no longer depends on which other modules happen to be installed.

runbot-243633

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278346

Introduced in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/96974, this is a new load more mechanism that loads all the new lines. When trying to display 3000+ lines in the browser it would crash as too many components were getting created and the DOM was overloaded.

To solve this issue, a virtual grid is used to only render the lines inside the user view (plus a margin of 0.5 view on top + bottom). However, the report lines were not made to be created, updated and deleted this often.

The creation and suppression were improved by always keeping the same number of lines rendered.
This is done by using a list of lines to display and hiding lines that don't need to be displayed anymore. Since the lines all have a similar height, this number should always stabilize at (user view height) * 2 / 31px.

A lot of expensive computations were done when displaying or rendering the lines, such as lines searched or the account status badge. Instead, we opt to calculate them when they are displayed and then store them to not be computed again.

A big part of the remaining time is taken by the reactivity system, which greatly increases the time taken and the memory used. This was partially solved by:

removing useless reactivity on the controller in different components
caching the custom components and templates on the controller.
marking the lines as a raw Object to remove the proxy objects of the reactivity which takes a lot of memory and time.

This also introduces a lot of breaking changes:
- cachedFilterOptions and options are now a signal of a proxy so they need () after accessing them.
- virtual lines are a proxy with signal for the primitives so accessing a primitive such as level needs ().
- some functions were moved as computed to help reduce the number of renders of components.
- using "key" in virtual_line/virtual_cell is advised against since keys are always added and never removed (instead test for the value of the primitive, for example instead of "level" in line use line.level?.()) However, if the key points to an array and not an object, the length is reactive since we want to easily support t-for for arrays.

task-5478504

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

Currently, an error occurs when a user uploads a document.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `ai_documents` module.
 - Go to `Documents` and create a `folder`, or use an `existing one`.
 - Open the `folder` > click `Actions` > `Auto-sort`, and `save`.
 - Uninstall the `ai_documents` module.
 - Go back to `Documents`, open the `same folder`, and `upload any document`.
 - Error is logged in the `terminal`.

`ValueError: Invalid field documents.document.ai_sortable in condition ('ai_sortable', '=', True)`

When the ai_documents module is installed and the user enables Auto-sort for a folder [1], an 
automation rule and its linked server action are created [2] (if they do not already exist). 
Whenever a document is uploaded to that folder, the automation rule triggers the server action, 
which runs the AI prompt to classify and sort the document.
However, when the ai_documents module is uninstalled, the related automation rule and server 
action are not removed. As a result, uploading a document to the same folder still triggers the 
automation rule. While evaluating its domain, it attempts to access the ai_sortable field, which 
no longer exists because it is defined by the ai_documents module, raise the error [3].

This commit ensures that uninstalling the ai_documents module removes the related automation 
rules. The linked server actions are then deleted automatically through the field's ondelete='cascade' [4].

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c6d3efb164a23d555e30d0f0f7de3de2ef1d08d3/ai_documents/wizard/ai_documents_sort.py#L100

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c6d3efb164a23d555e30d0f0f7de3de2ef1d08d3/ai_documents/models/documents_document.py#L313-L330

[3]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/c6d3efb164a23d555e30d0f0f7de3de2ef1d08d3/ai_documents/models/documents_document.py#L321

[4]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2cb2f33c871bf83c74098ada568e167aad24f2a5/addons/base_automation/models/ir_actions_server.py#L17


sentry-7607903354

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124488

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

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#125893
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124686

Issue
-----
When making an international delivery to a partner with different invoice and delivery addresses, we send the delivery address as the `Sold To` address as well.

Problematic case 1
-----
- Create a belgian company
- Setup UPS
- Create a French customer
	- Add a different french delivery address
- Create a product (with some weight)
- Create a SO (with UPS delivery) to the customer & confirm
- Validate the transfer

> Commercial invoice `Sold To` uses the delivery address

Solution for case 1
-----
Use the delivery address' `commercial_partner_id`. This leads to another issue in some edge cases...

Problematic case 2 (caused by case 1 fix)
-----
- Create a belgian company
- Setup UPS
- Create a French customer
	- Add a delivery address in Switzerland
- Create a product (with some weight)
- Create a SO (with UPS delivery) to the customer & confirm
- Validate the transfer

> UPS error `The Sold To party's country code must be the same as the Ship To party's country code with the exception of Canada and satellite countries.`

Solution for case 2
-----
Default back to delivery address for the `Sold To` field when countries don't match, as this is a limitation of the UPS API. Warn the user, either on the SO or the transfer itself (if no SO).

Warning looks like this (on SO):
<img width="1914" height="716" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f7aa73c4-f24c-42da-8f3e-6a58765ef020" />

-----
Ticket:
opw-6200263

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123163
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118031

**Steps to reproduce the issue:**

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

**Description:**

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

**Reference videos:**

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


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


OPW -6305080 
UPG - 4268848

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125738
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123009

Resizing a work order from the right edge in the Gantt view updated only the stop date (`date_finished`). Since the work order Gantt view defines dependencies, this triggered dependency propagation through `web_gantt_reschedule`. During that flow, `_web_gantt_move_candidates` needed both the old start and stop dates to update dependent work orders,
but the old-value snapshot only contained fields present in `vals`. As a result, `date_start` was missing and the resize crashed with a `KeyError: 'date_start'`.

Handle the missing old start date in the generic Gantt dependency propagation flow. When only the stop date is changed, the old start date is added to the old-value snapshot without adding it to the actual write values. This keeps the right-edge resize payload unchanged while giving dependency propagation the values it needs.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a manufacturing order with work orders.
2. Plan the manufacturing order.
3. Open the Work Order Gantt view.
4. Resize a work order from the right edge to change its planned end date.

Before this commit:
Right-edge resizing a work order with dependencies crashed during dependency propagation with `KeyError: 'date_start'`.

After this commit:
Right-edge resizing keeps the changed `date_finished`, dependency propagation has access to the old `date_start`, and dependent work orders are rescheduled without crashing.

task-6345347

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122288

A previous PR (https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/120063) introduced the new display_on_dmfa field for warnings to be displayed on the DMFA form view. This was initially done because we were anticipating the possibility of having warnings that should be displayed on both DMFA and single models. However, the new direction is that we should only expect warnings to be displayed on DMFA and dashboard or model and dashboard so we can instead use the display_on_model field and set model_id to l10n_be.dmfa.

Going forward, the idea is that warnings that have display_on_model set, should work on a recordset of model_id records. This was already what the DMFA warnings were doing by supposing self to be a dmfa record, but this is not the case for many other warnings. To avoid breaking everything, we leave self in the localdict as a reference to the warning record and we add a new value 'record' which will be a recordset of the model defined in model_id. To keep the DMFA warnings working, we substitute self with record in the computation.

Also, we remove the default from model_id because, since now the field is always visible, it creates confusion to have it set at hr.employee.

Furthermore we take away the possibility of creating new models from the dropdown of the model_id field and we eliminate a constraint on the model of the warning_records, which is only constraining our ability to write warnings without any real upside.

Task: 6429645

## 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#125859
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

[FIX] mrp_workorder_plm: avoid singleton traceback when matching BOM operations
**Issue**
Adding a step in a manufacturing order with two operations that are too similar
could lead to a traceback when proposing an improvement from the Shop Floor.

**Steps to reproduce**
- Install the Product Lifecycle Management app.
- Create a BOM for any product with two operations that:
	- Have the same name and work center
	- Have no variant
- Create and confirm a Manufacturing Order for that product.
- Open the Shop Floor view.
- Click the gear icon -> Update Instructions -> Improvement Suggestion -> Add a Step -> Propose a Change.
-> A traceback occurs

**Cause**
When adding a step:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1c02615b73a2b4fb9f1ab91167a3c8d7c9ac824c/mrp_workorder_plm/models/mrp_workorder.py#L10
It tries to find the corresponding operation in the ECO's new BoM.
This relies on `_get_sync_values()`:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1c02615b73a2b4fb9f1ab91167a3c8d7c9ac824c/mrp_plm/models/mrp_routing.py#L9-L13
Because two operations share the same name, work center, and no variant, both match the filter:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1c02615b73a2b4fb9f1ab91167a3c8d7c9ac824c/mrp_workorder_plm/models/mrp_workorder.py#L39
This results in a singleton error when accessing `operation.id`:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1c02615b73a2b4fb9f1ab91167a3c8d7c9ac824c/mrp_workorder_plm/models/mrp_workorder.py#L42

opw-6241880

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123673
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#119404

Currently, an error occurs when a user removes the Tax Treatment Category of an Australian employee.

Steps to Reproduce:
 - Install the `l10n_au_hr_payroll` module with demo data.
 - Switch to an `Australian company`.
 - Open any `Employee` > `Payroll` > remove the `Tax Treatment Category` value.

`UnboundLocalError: cannot access local variable 'code' where it is not associated with a value`

After the [change] in selection field behavior, users can clear the value of the field. When the 
user removes the Tax Treatment Category value, the system computes the tax treatment 
code [1]. During this process, if no condition matches, the code variable is not initialized. 
Converting this uninitialized variable to a string [2] raises an error.

This commit ensures that when the tax treatment category is not set, the tax treatment code is 
set to False with an early return. Since the tax treatment category is required field and compute 
the correct tax treatment code, once the category is set.

[change]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/214422/changes/8d2a42ac419fdf7943a0c11beb8c5de6c6f85bef

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/017743cbe97b629e9d9f1895b655014d4c3abbcb/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_version.py#L450-L451

[2]- https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/017743cbe97b629e9d9f1895b655014d4c3abbcb/l10n_au_hr_payroll/models/hr_version.py#L515

No task ID

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124067

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#125909
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120595

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#125772
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124826

**_Steps to reproduce :_**

-  Install l10n_it_riba.
-  Configure a company with a San Marino (SM) IBAN as the bank account for the
   journal used for Ri.Ba.
-  Create a customer payment and add it to a Batch Payment using the Ri.Ba.
   payment method.
-  Validate the Batch Payment.

**_Observed behavior :_**

 The validation fails with the error:
   `Only bank accounts with an Italian IBAN are allowed to use Ri.Ba. payments`

**_Cause :_** 

 The Ri.Ba. validation logic only accepts IBANs with the IT country code and incorrectly rejects valid San Marino (SM) IBANs.

**_Fix :_**

-  Update the Ri.Ba. IBAN validation to accept both Italian (IT) and San Marino (SM) IBANs when generating Ri.Ba. payment files.

-  While validating Batch Payments for SM IBANs, we observed that the extracted value could overlap with the branch code portion, causing the generated RIBA record to exceed the expected 120-character length. This change updates the extraction logic to prevent overlap and ensure compliance with the required record format.

**_opw_** - 6303820

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125694
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121439

# 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#125791
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123263

Currently, an error occurs when processing Ecuadorian EDI invoices that
use taxes from the `Special Consumptions (ICE)` tax group.

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install `l10n_ec_edi` and switch to an EC Company.
- Create a new tax with the `Tax Group` set to `Special Consumptions (ICE)`.
- Create an invoice using this tax.
- Confirm the invoice and click `Process Now`.

**Error:**
```
  File "/home/odoo/odoo/enterprise/saas-18.4/l10n_ec_edi/models/account_edi_format.py", line 373, in _l10n_ec_get_base_lines
    code_percentage = L10N_EC_VAT_SUBTAXES[tax_data['tax'].tax_group_id.l10n_ec_type]
KeyError: 'ice'
```

**Root Cause:**
At [1], non-VAT tax groups such as `ICE` are explicitly not supported
and are not included in `L10N_EC_VAT_SUBTAXES`.

At [2], the code assumes that every Ecuadorian tax group exists in
`L10N_EC_VAT_SUBTAXES` and directly indexes the mapping using
`tax_group_id.l10n_ec_type`. When an invoice uses an `ICE`
tax, causing an error.

**Fix:**
This commit prevents errors by using the tax's `Code ATS` as the
`codigoPorcentaje` value and the tax's `amount` as the `tarifa` in
the XML when the tax group is not present in `L10N_EC_VAT_SUBTAXES`.
(Confirm with the PO [here], just to fix it from 18.4, that the problem is 
that it is not working on the versions where we already introduced the feature.)

[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/a388b9298268eead53ffa9d33bff7e1927dae33c/l10n_ec_edi/models/account_move.py#L17-L38

[2]:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/a388b9298268eead53ffa9d33bff7e1927dae33c/l10n_ec_edi/models/account_edi_format.py#L372-L377

[here]:
https://www.odoo.com/mail/message/1121493378

opw-6373984
opw-6430589
opw-6423812

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123918

**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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123564

The JsonFormatter has two bugs

- the ignore list is not working as expected
- in 18.0-18.4 the 'test' key is broken

This commit add tests to ensure those behavior works as expected

While on it, also adds a `additional_record_keys` parameter to allow to specifically add keys to the default list, without having to override the whole list, and add additional default keys (exc_info and test)

The previous `ignored_record_keys` default value was possible to remove by calling `JSONFormatter(ignore_record_keys=[])`

The purpose was to be able to easily include all keys and ignore the default ingnore list, but this makes the additional blacklisting of a few keys more tedious, and the general usage and implementation more complex

`JSONFormatter(ignore_record_keys=[*JSONFormatter.DEFAULT_IGNORED_RECORD_KEYS, 'other key'])`

To simplify the logic, **this is not the case anymore**, so to include all keys something like this would be needed

`JSONFormatter(additional_record_keys=JSONFormatter.DEFAULT_IGNORED_RECORD_KEYS)`

Or an hardcoded list.