### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
This PR fixes an issue in the Sign module where replacing a document breaks the link between a signer and their multiple signature fields, causing Odoo to erroneously generate separate signers for each individual field.

### Current behavior before PR:
When a document with multiple signature fields assigned to the same person is replaced, the _copy_sign_items_to function duplicates the sign.item records. During this duplication process, Odoo duplicates the old responsible_ids, creating copies with new ids. These new copies overwrite the old responsible_ids, ensuring that the newly created sign_items have entirely new responsible_ids. 
Because a shared responsible_id is the primary key Odoo uses to group multiple signature items under a single signer, this change in ID causes the system to lose the grouping. As a result, Odoo treats each copied field as belonging to a completely new, separate signer. 

_Note_:
Because of the limitation mentioned before, any responsible_id that is passed through the copy function, and thereby the copy_data function, is overwritten with new ids. The only work-around then is to update the responsible_id value attached to the new_sign_item after the copy_data function has completed and the new_sign_item has been created. 

### Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The original responsible_id is explicitly carried over and assigned to the newly copied sign.item immediately after the copy operation completes. This ensures the copied signature fields retain their original role IDs and grouping, keeping them correctly assigned to the single original signer.

opw-6354334

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123628

### Issue:
When an invoice has a down payment on a line with a withholding tax, the `PrepaidPayment/PaidAmount` in the UBL XML included the withholding tax amount, causing a mismatch with `LegalMonetaryTotal/PrepaidAmount` which correctly excludes it

### Cause:
`PrepaidPayment/PaidAmount` was set directly from `prepayment_move.amount_total`, which includes all taxes `LegalMonetaryTotal/PrepaidAmount` uses `_aggregate_base_line_tax_details` to exclude withholding taxes, but this was not applied to the `PrepaidPayment` node

### Fix:
Using `prepayment_move.amount_total` directly includes all taxes and does not match the rounding logic of `LegalMonetaryTotal`

Instead, `_aggregate_base_line_tax_details` is used with the same `total_grouping_function` as `LegalMonetaryTotal`, ensuring both nodes use the same rounding logic and exclude withholding taxes

Reversed down payment moves are also excluded from `AdditionalDocumentReference` to avoid referencing cancelled invoices

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_pe_edi` and `sale_management` with demo data
- Switch to the PE company
- Create and confirm a Sale Order (Customer: PE Company, Product: Any, Unit Price: 200, Taxes: VAT 18% and 3% IGV Withholding)
- Create, confirm and pay a Down Payment Invoice (Fixed: 28.92)
- Go back to the SO and create the Regular Invoice
- Confirm it and click Process Now
- Open the EDI Document tab and download the XML

Before the fix, the sum of `PrepaidPayment/PaidAmount` did not match `LegalMonetaryTotal/PrepaidAmount`

opw-6273903

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126776
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121733

When using the click & collect option, the available qty for renting was not taking the selected warehouse into account.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Create 2 different warehouses with 2 different adresses
* Create a product available for renting
* Setup the product to use serial numbers
* Create 2 serial number, 1 in each warehouse
* Activate the click & collect option on the website
* Create a first sale order to collect in warehouse 1
* In the backend, confirm the order and pick it up
* Go back to the website and make a second order for the second warehouse
> Observation: When clicking on the "Add to cart" you get an error
  saying that there is no quantity available

Why the fix:
------------
When computing the `product_rented_quantities` it would look for `sale.order.line` in all the warehouse. So it would find the line from the first order even if it's not linked to the selected warehouse. So we just add a new element to the domain to filter out the incorrect warehouses.

opw-6328475

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126545
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124969

### Issue:
When accessing the Bank Reconciliation view directly via URL or bookmark, auto-matching with reconciliation models may not trigger and the upload button may be visible on synchronized journals

### Cause:
`_action_open_bank_reconciliation_widget` injects two context keys:
- `auto_statement_processing`: triggers auto-reconciliation on statement creation
- `bank_statements_source`: hides the upload button for synchronized journals

When the view is accessed directly, these keys are not present, causing the UI to ignore them

`auto_statement_processing` is now set directly in the user context via `onWillRender`/`onWillDestroy` in `BankRecKanbanController` `bank_statements_source` requires an ORM call to fetch the journal's value and is resolved via `fetchBankStatementsSourceInto` on startup

Notes:
The fix for `bank_statements_source` was added opportunistically while addressing `auto_statement_processing`

Steps to reproduce:
- Install `accountant` with demo data
- Duplicate the Bank Journal and set Bank Feeds to Online Synchronization
- Open the Accounting Dashboard and open the Bank (copy)
- Create a transaction (Label: Test, any amount) and click Add & Close
- In the 3 dots menu, choose Manage Models
- Create a Reconciliation Model (Label contains: Test, Lines: any account, default values)
- Click Automate
- Go back to the Bank Reconciliation page and verify:
 -- The transaction is reconciled automatically
 -- No Upload button is displayed
- Create a new transaction, it should be reconciled automatically
- Copy the URL and open it in a new tab
- Create a new transaction

Before the fix, the transaction is not reconciled and the Upload button is present

opw-6391107

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126706
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126359

Steps to reproduce:-
- Open any report.
- Click on a particular line to unfold more than once very fast(or throttle network to 3G)
- Once line is unfolded click again to fold that line.
- Line is not folding.

Cause:-
- When we clicked multiple times to unfold line, duplicate child lines were created(as many times as many times we clicked).
- Because when first promise was not resolved so `unfolded = false` and we clicked again so new promise also tries to unfold  the same line, resulting in unfolding the same line multiple times.
- In version 17.0 these duplicate child lines are created but somehow not visible but it breaks `foldLine`. From version 18.0 onwards these duplicate child lines are visible.

Solution: In `unfoldLine` set the flag `unfolding`. So in all clicks other than first, we get `unfolding = true` and don't proceed further, preventing unfolding the same line multiple times.

task-6260425

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126765
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120392

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Enable "Move Entire Packages" setting on deliveries
- Make a product A, that has a package P1, on hand qty of 1
- Make product B that don't have a package, but on hand qty of 1
- Make a delivery that has both of those products, requested qty of 1 for both
- Mark it as todo
- Go to the barcode app, select the delivery
- Select the line with product B
- Select the line with product A
--> The line with product B is not unselected

**Why the fix:**

When we have a mix of packaged products and products without a package on the same operation, they are handled separately.
The products without a package are handled in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/98c79af3fb6cb354f46fd2f58e642a72a9271443/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L388-L392 
that calls https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/98c79af3fb6cb354f46fd2f58e642a72a9271443/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1277-L1284 
But as you can see, there are no mention of the selected package line, which is stored in **this.lastScanned.packageId**.

As we do not touch this variable, the selected package line stays selected.

The same is true for the other way around, when we select a package line we call https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/98c79af3fb6cb354f46fd2f58e642a72a9271443/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L394-L398 
This function does not care for the **selectedLineVirtualId** which represents the selected line without a package.

To avoid this and make it so that only one line is selected even if they have different package, we now set the corresponding value to false to unselect the other line in all situation.

This is basically how it's done in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/98c79af3fb6cb354f46fd2f58e642a72a9271443/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_model.js#L1202-L1208 
to unselect every line regardless of packages.

opw-6266203

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126790
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122038

**Before this change**
We have the potential to attempt to send a notification email from virtual records created by our `BaseModel.new()` method. This can happen during an `onchange` request, given that we'll be working with a virtual "snapshot" record to recompute potentially changed values for our origin record after a change to one or more values.

This issue manifests when using Studio to attach a many2many field to a form view, where the related model is "Approval Request". If an approval request record in either the "Approved" or "Refused" state is attached to our record via this new Studio field, any `onchange` requests will trigger this bug. This is because we can't send messages on a virtual record.

**After this change**
Prevent the creation and sending of a message if we are computing the request status of a virtual `approval.request()` record. The field `request_status` on this model is computed and stored, but the fact that it is a computed field means that it must be recomputed for a virtual record, even if the origin record already has a stored `request_status`. Thus, we may need to compute a `request_status` value for an ephemeral "snapshot" record.

Though the issue only manifests for the "Approved" and "Refused" states, this PR expands on a test that covers every approval request state.

opw-6390453

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125374