Wednesday, August 5, 2026
11 changes · saas-19.3
Enhancements to existing features
Payment XML files now include the building number field required by the ISO 20022 standard from November 2026. This helps keep SEPA and related bank payment exports compliant ahead of the deadline, reducing the risk of rejected payments later.
Original PR description
This commit adds the <BldgNb> node in the iso20022 XML files, as it will be mandatory starting November 2026. Linked: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/271855 task-6317758 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126532 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121674
Validating large SEPA direct debit batches is now faster, especially when processing hundreds or thousands of payments. This reduces waiting time and helps prevent timeouts during payment validation and customer pre-notification.
Original PR description
- Replace the `id:recordset` aggregation in `_get_expiry_date_per_mandate()` with `date:max` to compute the latest payment date directly in SQL. - Render `email_from` for all payments in batch and cache the computed authors by sender email to avoid repeated partner lookups during SDD pre-notification. This reduces ORM/cache overhead when validating large SEPA batches containing thousands of payments. Measured on a production-sized database: | metric | before | after | factor | |--------|-------:|------:|-------:| | `_get_expiry_date_per_mandate` (500 payments) | 564 ms | 111 ms | ~5x | | `_send_after_validation` notification (500 payments) | 92.9 s | 55.7 s | ~1.7x | | `_get_expiry_date_per_mandate` (1000 payments) | 890 ms | 178 ms | ~5x | | `_send_after_validation` notification (1000 payments) | timed out (>159 s) | 108.9 s | completed | OPW-6377340 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126429 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125439
Creating reconciliation rules from bank statement lines is now more reliable when transaction references are very long. The update reduces memory use and processing time, avoiding failures that could block users from assigning accounts to bank statements.
Original PR description
When setting an account to an account.bank.statement there is a step to automatically create a reconciliation rule/model if one does not exist already. To do so, we retrieve 5…
When setting an account to an account.bank.statement there is a step to automatically create a reconciliation rule/model if one does not exist already. To do so, we retrieve 5 account.bank.statement.lines and use them to define the reconciliation model config. A matching is done on the payment_ref of the account.bank.statement.lines by finding the longest common substring in the reference. ### Current Implementation The current algorithm does so by first generating all the possible substrings for all the payment_ref before doing the intersection between these sets and returning the max if `len(substring) >=10`. This is reasonable when the payment_ref follows either a SEPA communication national standard like the Belgian one or the Creditor Reference standard (ISO 11649). For transactions with large, unstructured communication with more than 100 chars, the method `_get_common_substrings` quickly overfill the memory, sometimes raising a MemoryErorr, and takes a significant amount of time. That's because the nested function `_generate_all_substrings` generates n*(n+1)/2 substrings, with n being the lenght of a payment_ref, called `label` in `generate_all_substrings`. ### Proposed Fix This commit introduces another algorithm to find the largest common substring. It starts by taking the two smallest labels to find their substrings intersection. We know that for an arbitrary collection of labels, the intersection of their substrings sets A ∩ B ∩...∩ Z is included in the intersection of any two substrings sets. The underlying assumption of the first step is that for an arbitrary collection of labels the intersection of the substrings sets of the two smallest labels will be the smallest intersection of any given pair of substrings sets. This won't hold true everytime and using a metric such as label similarity instead of shortest string might be better. But on average this should be good enough and it's easier to implement + it removes the need of preprocessing the labels to compute the similarity. The point of the new nested function `common_substrings` is to discard common substrings as we build them. Using the current `generate_all_substsrings` on either the smallest label or both smallest labels would still generate and store a lot of substrings, especially for large labels. By yielding the common substrings as we find them, the memory footprint is vastly reduced. Lastly, the next substring in the common_substrings iterable is only checked against the remaining labels if it's longer than the current match. This speeds up the whole process ### speedup In a customer database with some account.bank.statement.line with payment_ref > 500 chars, setting a specific account (code 4970) on transactions goes from MemoryError to < 1Mb memory consumption. Because of the memory consumption it was not possible to gather timing value on the current version. Testing the new algorithm in a shell and using as labels the 5 longest payment_ref in the customer database (831, 831, 1117, 1178, 1300 chars), averaging to 2000 chars once normalised, the average time to execute `_get_common_substrings` is 900 ms ± 10.3 ms. Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121575 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118824
Resolved issues and error corrections
Businesses using Avalara Brazil can now confirm multiple customer invoices at once without the process failing. This prevents validation interruptions and supports smoother batch invoicing workflows.
Original PR description
**_Steps to reproduce:_** * Install `l10n_br_avatax` and configure Avalara Brazil. * Create at least two customer invoices. * Ensure the fiscal position is set to **Automatic Tax Mapping (Avalara…
**_Steps to reproduce:_** * Install `l10n_br_avatax` and configure Avalara Brazil. * Create at least two customer invoices. * Ensure the fiscal position is set to **Automatic Tax Mapping (Avalara Brazil)**. * Select the invoices and click **Action → Confirm Entries**. **_Observed behavior:_** * A traceback is raised with `ValueError: Expected singleton: account.move(...)` and the invoices cannot be validated. **_Cause:_** * During tax extraction, `_extract_tax_values_from_l10n_br_avatax_detail` accesses `self.invoice_filter_type_domain` while `self` may contain multiple `account.move` records. * Accessing `invoice_filter_type_domain` on a multi-recordset raises an `Expected singleton` error, preventing the validation of multiple invoices. **_Fix:_** * Build the returned tax values by iterating over each invoice in the recordset and using the corresponding `invoice_filter_type_domain`. * This ensures `_extract_tax_values_from_l10n_br_avatax_detail` correctly handles multiple invoices during validation without raising a singleton error. opw-6334761 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126437 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124993
Cancelled Mexican CFDI invoices now keep showing their required fiscal details when reprinted, including QR codes, digital stamps, and fiscal folios. This helps businesses retain legally relevant proof that an invoice was issued and later cancelled.
Original PR description
### Issue before this commit: When an invoice's CFDI cancellation request is confirmed (state moves from sent to cancel), reprinting the invoice PDF no longer displays the fiscal information (QR…
### Issue before this commit: When an invoice's CFDI cancellation request is confirmed (state moves from sent to cancel), reprinting the invoice PDF no longer displays the fiscal information (QR code, digital stamps, fiscal folio/UUID, etc.), even though the signed CFDI attachment is still present on the invoice. ### Steps to reproduce the issue: 1. Download Accounting and l10n_mx 2. Create an invoice and send it to CFDI 3. Select 'Request for cancel' 4. Wait and click retry button in the CFDI tab until the invoice is marked as cancelled 5. Print the invoice again 6. See PDF does not show fiscal information (QR, fiscal folio, etc.) ### Cause of the issue: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/f6c94d4ca3ef4211a5ab00bf0b39f6a7675c8f79/l10n_mx_edi/models/account_move.py#L904-L909 Once the CFDI is cancelled, the computed field switches to 'cancel', so the condition fails and the method falls back to the generic account.report_invoice_document template, which has no knowledge of CFDI fiscal fields. ### Reason to introduce the fix: A cancelled CFDI invoice is still a legally relevant fiscal document in Mexico and must be reprintable with its fiscal data intact (to prove it was issued and later cancelled). The fix extends the condition to also cover the 'cancel' state, ensuring the CFDI-specific report template is used whenever a valid attachment exists, regardless of whether the CFDI is currently signed or cancelled. opw-6393656 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126466
The aged payable and receivable drill-down now hides invoices and bills that were already fully settled for the selected reporting date. This helps users see only genuinely outstanding items and improves accuracy when reviewing historical balances.
Original PR description
Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create a vendor/customer with multiple bills/invoices. 2. Fully pay one or more, leaving at least one still open for the same partner. 3. Open Accounting > Reporting > Partner…
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a vendor/customer with multiple bills/invoices.
2. Fully pay one or more, leaving at least one still open for the same partner.
3. Open Accounting > Reporting > Partner Reports > Aged Payable/Receivable.
4. Set to any date and click into an aging bucket for that partner.
Issue:
The drill-down list shows fully settled bills (residual = 0.00) alongside genuinely outstanding ones. Only surfaces when the partner has at least one open balance — if everything is paid, there is no bucket to click into.
Root Cause:
aged_partner_balance_audit builds the drill-down domain filtering only by reconcile flag, journal type, and date range — never checking residual. Additionally it completely overwrites the XML action domain (account.action_amounts_to_settle) which already had ('amount_residual', '!=', 0), losing that protection entirely.
Fix:
Added ('residual_at_date', '!=', 0) to the domain in aged_partner_balance_audit and set recon_limit in the action context so residual_at_date computes as of the report's 'as of' date rather than today's value:
action['context'] = {
'recon_limit': options['date']['date_to'],
}
Without recon_limit, residual_at_date falls back to amount_residual (today's value) which incorrectly excludes bills that were genuinely open on the report date but paid after it.
Result:
The drill-down now correctly shows only genuinely outstanding items regardless of whether the report is run as of today or a historical date.
opw 6333699
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126021Updated Peruvian electronic invoice address formatting to match SUNAT's current UBL 2.1 requirements. This helps invoices pass official validation by correctly structuring district and urban subdivision information.
Original PR description
Update electronic invoicing address nodes to align with current SUNAT requirements. This transitions the geographic data formatting from the legacy UBL 2.0 schema to the standard UBL 2.1 specification, ensuring proper structural validation for districts and urban subdivisions. Documentation used: https://cpe.sunat.gob.pe/sites/default/files/inline-files/guia+xml+factura+version+2-1+1+0+(2)_0+(2).pdf opw-6282314 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126380 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121390
The spreadsheet pivot field picker now hides date and datetime fields once all available time breakdowns have already been added. This prevents duplicate entries and makes drag-and-drop behavior more reliable for users configuring pivots.
Original PR description
Current behavior before PR: - Date and datetime fields remained visible even when all their granularities were already added to the pivot. - Users could add the same field with the same granularity multiple times, creating duplicate IDs and causing unexpected drag and drop behavior. Desired behavior after PR is merged: - Hide date and datetime fields from the popup once all available granularities have already been added to the pivot. - This prevents duplicate field IDs and keeps the popup behavior consistent with spreadsheet pivots during drag-and-drop. Task: [6295794](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/2328/tasks/6295794) Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123280
Fixed an error where customer Total Due in Point of Sale could show the wrong amount when the company currency differed from the PoS currency. Pay-later balances are now calculated in the correct currency, helping staff see accurate customer debt amounts.
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce: - set the company currency to XCG - set the PoS sales journal currency and the PoS pricelist currency to USD - configure a XCG <-> USD rate - create a customer without any…
Steps to reproduce: - set the company currency to XCG - set the PoS sales journal currency and the PoS pricelist currency to USD - configure a XCG <-> USD rate - create a customer without any outstanding balance - open the PoS, create an order of USD 100 and validate it with the Customer Account (Pay Later) payment method - open the Customers screen and look at the Total Due of that customer Issue: The Total Due shows about USD 55.56, i.e. the amount converted once too many, instead of the expected USD 100. Cause: get_total_due() sums two amounts that are not expressed in the same currency before converting them. partner.total_due comes from the accounting entries, it is the sum of account.move.line.amount_residual and is therefore in company currency, while total_settled is the sum of pos.payment.amount of the still open sessions, which is in the currency of the order, so the PoS one. The addition is done first and the result is then converted from the company currency to the PoS one, so the pay later payments end up converted a second time. opw-6403320 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126402 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125798
Appointment booking links now open correctly when the appointment type uses non-ASCII characters, such as Arabic names. This prevents customers from getting stuck in repeated redirects and lets them complete the booking form as expected.
Original PR description
Clicking a slot on an appointment type with a non-ASCII name (for example an Arabic title) puts the browser in an endless 301 loop, so the info form never opens. ### Steps to reproduce - Create an…
Clicking a slot on an appointment type with a non-ASCII name (for example an Arabic title) puts the browser in an endless 301 loop, so the info form never opens. ### Steps to reproduce - Create an appointment type with an Arabic name, e.g. `عنوان`. - Open its page and pick a time slot. - The browser keeps redirecting on `/appointment/<slug>/info` and fails with "too many redirections". ### Cause The info URL is built from the slug `<name>-<id>`, here `عنوان-1`. We build a `URL` with `encodeURIComponent(slug)`, so `url.href` is already encoded once (`عنوان` becomes `%D8%B9...`). But we then navigate with `encodeURI(url.href)`, and `encodeURI` escapes the `%` signs a second time, so `%D8%B9...` becomes `%25D8%25B9...`. The slug is now encoded twice. To canonicalize the URL, the server decodes the request path and the path it rebuilds from the route, once each, and redirects if they differ. For a normal URL they are equal. For ours they are not, because one side is decoded one step less than the other, so the server keeps answering 301 with the same double-encoded URL. An ASCII slug has no `%` for `encodeURI` to escape, so only non-ASCII names hit this. ### Fix Navigate to `url.href` directly. It is already encoded, so the extra `encodeURI` only broke it. Same fix on the manual resource confirmation path. opw-6409641
User-facing messages and warnings now show selection field values in the user's language instead of leaving some labels untranslated. This improves clarity across accounting, payroll, recruitment, appointments, IoT, point of sale, documents, surveys, and localization reports.
Original PR description
The `selection` attribute of `fields.Selection` is not generally translated (unless it is a function instead of a list). For user facing strings, we generally need to translate the value displayed. Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126633 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126538