The fix introduced in https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/9e9c99712ad4b9d58dc7601da41a852e457ad097 didn't account for the fact that `post.get('media_url') ` could return a None value, which in turn would raise en error when trying to concatenate the value later.

This in turn:
- will block syncing of instagram instagram posts
- will raise a traceback when you open the Social Marketing module and the auto-sync kicks in.
### Example traceback
```
Traceback (most recent call last):
[...]
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/social_instagram/models/social_stream.py", line 86, in _fetch_stream_data
    return self._fetch_instagram_posts()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.2/social_instagram/models/social_stream.py", line 64, in _fetch_instagram_posts
    values['message'] = (values['message'] + "\n" + post.get('media_url')).strip()
                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TypeError: can only concatenate str (not "NoneType") to str
```

### Solution:
Fallback to an empty string if `post.get('media_url')` yields a None value.

OPW-6449357

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127049
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126987

**Description**

When printing the legal PDF of a CFE, the report can request a dedicated addenda page (`adenda=true` report parameter) when the addenda does not fit in the small box of the standard report (roughly 6 lines of 140 characters).

`l10n_uy_edi_document._get_report_params()` computed the addenda by calling `self.move_id._l10n_uy_edi_get_addenda()` directly. For e-remito EDI documents created from stock pickings, `move_id` is not set, so the addenda was always empty and the dedicated addenda page was never requested for delivery guides.

**Changes**

- Resolve the addenda from the document origin record: reuse the existing `_get_origin_record()` abstraction. Add it on `l10n_uy_edi.document` (returns the move) and let `l10n_uy_edi_stock` extend it to fall back to `picking_id`; `_get_report_params()` now reads the addenda through it.
- Remove a no-op `_get_pdf()` override in `l10n_uy_edi_stock`.
- Add a unit test covering the dedicated addenda page threshold (6 lines x 140 chars) for delivery guides.

**Note**

This PR replaces branch `adhoc-dev:18.0-t-stock-edi-addenda-fix-kz` (original authorship preserved); resubmitted from a new branch to keep follow-up and tracking with the current maintainer.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124539

### Steps to Reproduce:
1. Go to Helpdesk and create an SLA
2. Create a new Ticket
3. Use Studio to add the field `sla_reached`
4. Apply the SLA
5. Notice that the field is True

### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
**Issue:** The `_compute_sla_reached` method in on `helpdesk_ticket.py` determines whether an SLA has been reached by checking if `exceeded_hours` is less than 0 on its `helpdesk.sla.status` records. Since every newly assigned SLA has a future deadline, `exceeded_hours` starts as negative (AKA <0), so the ticket is immediately flagged as `sla_reached = True` before any progress has been made. Conversely, a ticket that reaches its target stage after the deadline has `exceeded_hours >= 0`, so it's incorrectly flagged as `sla_reached = False` even though the SLA target was genuinely reached (it was just late).

**Solution:** Change the domain in `_compute_sla_reached` to check `reached_datetime != False` instead of `exceeded_hours < 0`, matching the field already listed in the method's `@api.depends` and the same field `_sla_reach()` sets when a ticket enters its target stage. This makes `sla_reached` reflect actual stage progression rather than a time-remaining calculation.

### Current behavior before PR: 
A newly created ticket with a pending SLA shows `sla_reached = True` and `sla_success = True` immediately upon creation, before the ticket has moved to any target stage. SImilarly, a ticket that reaches its target stage after the SLA deadline is incorrectly marked `sla_reached = False`.

### Desired behavior after PR: 
`sla_reached` is False on ticket creation and only becomes True once the ticket actually enters the SLA's target stage. Lateness continues to be tracked separately and correctly via `sla_reached_late`

opw-6361851

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126432

### Issue before this commit:
When generating ZUGFeRD or Factur-X electronic invoices, including an HTML hyperlink (such as an email or website) in the document layout caused the final PDF to fail PDF/A validation. Portals would reject the file with the error: "An annotation dictionary does not contain the key F".

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_de
2. Go to Contacts > set Tax ID for company Bloem GmbH and also for DE company
3. Activate ZUGFeRD from settings
4. Go to settings and click on Configure Document Layout and insert something like <a href="mailto:info@company.de_skr03example.com"> info@company.de_skr03example.com</a> into the footer
5. Create an invoice to Bloem GmbH and send it through ZUGFeRD
6. Download PDF and upload it on https://www.portinvoice.com/
7. See error: An annotation dictionary does not contain the key F. With the exception of annotation dictionaries whose subtype value is Popup, all annotation dictionaries must contain the key F.

### Cause of the issue:
The underlying PDF generation engine creates hyperlinks as PDF annotations but omits the /F (Flags) key. During Odoo's PDF/A conversion process, these annotations were left unmodified. This violates the strict PDF/A specification, which mandates that all non-Popup annotations must explicitly define the /F key.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
This fix ensures full PDF/A compliance by iterating through all page annotations and injecting the missing /F key for any annotation that is not a Popup. This allows users to safely include clickable links in their invoice templates without breaking electronic document validation.

opw-6388212

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279024

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Downloading an attachment from the file viewer fails with a `405 Method Not Allowed` error when the attachment belongs to a Discuss channel.

I've already submitted a ticket to Odoo: #6430586

Steps to reproduce (on a 18.0 runbot):
1. open Discuss and send an image in a channel
2. click the image to open the file viewer
3. click the download button (either the one in the header or the one in the bottom
   toolbar)

The server rejects the request:

```
POST /discuss/channel/1/image/519861?filename=image.png&unique=32647b0f&download=true  405
```

and the user gets a `RPC_ERROR: Arbitrary Uncaught Python Exception` dialog reporting `405 Method Not Allowed`.

Cause: `download()` always issues a POST request, while the routes serving the attachments of a discuss channel only allow GET:

* `/discuss/channel/<int:channel_id>/attachment/<int:attachment_id>`
* `/discuss/channel/<int:channel_id>/image/<int:attachment_id>`

so the request never reaches the controller. Downloading the very same attachment from the attachment card in the conversation still works, because that one is a plain anchor navigation (GET).

This is a regression from fb152985f4b8 ("[FIX] web: download FileViewer files via blob helper"), which routed the file viewer download through `download()` in order to honor the filename sent by the server in the `Content-Disposition` header.

Only 18.0 is affected: saas-18.1 and saas-18.2 do not have the commit that introduced the regression, and from saas-18.3 on, the `urlRoute` override was dropped and channel attachments are served through the standard `/web/content` and  /web/image` routes, which are not restricted to GET. 
The download is still sent with POST on those branches though, hence forward-porting this up to master.

Current behavior before PR:

Downloading a Discuss channel attachment from the file viewer raises a 405 error and the file is not downloaded. Images and other file types are equally affected.

Desired behavior after PR is merged:

The file is downloaded, keeping the filename advertised by the server. The download is performed with a GET request through `downloadFile()`, which still goes through the blob helper, so the fix of fb152985f4b8 is preserved. This is already the way a file is downloaded from its url in `readonly_file.js`.

Added a test that downloads an image attachment of a channel from the file viewer and asserts the request is a GET on the channel attachment route. It fails before this fix with `POST /discuss/channel/1/image/1`.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279232