Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Install `l10n_pe_pos`.
2. Create a contact with the identification type DNI and a number.
3. Sell a product to this contact and print the receipt. -> the receipt shows "RUC" in front of the number, even though the number is a DNI and not a RUC.

Why it's happening
------------------
Since `aeaca097ae39` the number of the contact is printed with a label in front of it, before there was no label at all. This label is the `vat_label` of the country, so "RUC" for Peru. But in Peru each contact can have a different identifier, and the type is on the contact in `l10n_latam_identification_type_id`.

The fix
-------
In `l10n_pe_pos` we set `partner_vat_label` with the name of the identification type of the contact. If the contact has no identification type we keep the number alone.

Before vs After for a customer identified with DNI
-------------------------------------------------
<img width="465" height="203" alt="Capture d’écran 2026-07-30 à 14 45 17" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/85c921df-c1fd-430b-b4e6-341bc183bd61" />

<img width="467" height="253" alt="Capture d’écran 2026-07-30 à 14 49 36" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3ac243c6-04fe-47a4-a662-c59b88276db7" />





opw-6422619

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279409

### 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#281275
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279024

## Previous Behavior Before this PR:
Users could have their always-active event split by an AFK event inside of Timesheet Assistant. AFK event durations were also inaccurate, and the Google Meet description was incorrect.

## Steps to Reproduce:
1. Generate an always-active event (e.g., join a meeting in Google Meet).
2. Generate non-key events (e.g., visit a website without an ActivityWatch rule).
3. Go AFK.
4. Generate a new non-key event.
5. The Timesheet Assistant will show three suggestions in the following order: an always-active suggestion, an AFK suggestion, and another always-active suggestion for the same activity.

## New Expected Behavior After this PR:
The Timesheet Assistant now blocks the creation of AFK suggestions when the previous key event is marked as always-active. AFK event durations have been updated to ensure their values are accurate. The Google Meet description has also been corrected.

task-[6431526](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/4105/tasks/6431526)

When opening reports with `default_opening_date_filter='this_year'`(e.g., P&L, Partner Ledger), the date filter dropdown showed incorrect defaults for non-selected period types:
- Month showed the last month of the fiscal year (e.g., December)
  instead of the current month
- Quarter showed Q4 instead of the current quarter

This happened because `initDateFilterState()` used the backend's `date_to` (fiscal year end) as the reference for computing all filter periods. For `this_year`, `date_to` is the year-end date (e.g., 2026-12-31), so `computePeriodRange()` for month/quarter returned periods containing that date rather than today's date. Reports with `this_month` or `today` defaults were unaffected because their `date_to` is naturally close to today.

Now, non-selected filters use today as their reference date on initial load whenever today falls within the report period, while the selected filter continues to use the backend's `date_to`, preserving the alignment behavior introduced in the date filter refactor (https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/40484f985f511edd7ba2ae759ce63ef564bcf1f7).

Additionally, selecting the custom comparison filter now triggers an immediate reload so its default date range is recomputed by the backend. The custom comparison range is initialized using the current fiscal year up to today, capping its end date to today instead of inheriting the report's `date_to`, which could otherwise default to a future date for yearly reports.

task-6229588

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121638

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Install `l10n_pe_pos`.
2. Create a contact with the identification type DNI and a number.
3. Sell a product to this contact and print the receipt. -> the receipt shows "RUC" in front of the number, even though the number is a DNI and not a RUC.

Why it's happening
------------------
Since `aeaca097ae39` the number of the contact is printed with a label in front of it, before there was no label at all. This label is the `vat_label` of the country, so "RUC" for Peru. But in Peru each contact can have a different identifier, and the type is on the contact in `l10n_latam_identification_type_id`.

The fix
-------
In `l10n_pe_pos` we set `partner_vat_label` with the name of the identification type of the contact. If the contact has no identification type we keep the number alone.

Before vs After for a customer identified with DNI
-------------------------------------------------
<img width="465" height="203" alt="Capture d’écran 2026-07-30 à 14 45 17" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/85c921df-c1fd-430b-b4e6-341bc183bd61" />

<img width="467" height="253" alt="Capture d’écran 2026-07-30 à 14 49 36" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3ac243c6-04fe-47a4-a662-c59b88276db7" />





opw-6422619

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279409

You'll need two users :
	- Internal User A that can create projects
	- User B with a granted portal access

Optionnal third user to compare the flows :
	- Internal User B that can create tasks in a porject

- With User A, create a new project with atleast a single stage
- Go to the project settings
- Make sure that Visibility is set to : "All internal users and invited portal users"
- Click on Share Project
- Add User B as a new Collaborator with the Edit acess mode
- Confirm by clicking on Share Project
- Still in the project settings, click on the blue user icon in the top right to edit the Followers :
	- Make sure you are following the project
	- Click on the edit button and make sure Task Created is checked

 Optionnal for easiness of testing :
 - Go to the User A settings and in Preferences > Notifications : In Odoo

- Log in with User B (in a new incognito tab on the side is best)
- Go to Projects > The project that has been shared
- Create a new task

No notification is sent to User A. If the same flow is done using User C, then a notification is correctly sent.

The fields that determine to which users the notifications are sent to is `message_follower_ids`. In our case, the value of that field does not contain User A, so no notifcation is sent to them.

The method responsible for assigning values to that field is `_message_auto_subscribe()` which adds follower using subtypes parent relationship. The parent subtype of tasks are projects. So, essentially, we look for followers of the parent project, and see if we can add them to our task.

Before proceeding with the assignation, we check that the parent subtype's field was actually edited :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ea18f34a48d61350f80c79894bef66bf02840bfc/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py#L4778-L4781

So we look that `updated_values` contains "project_id". `updated_values` is created by the the `mail_thread` create method by joining the values in `vals_list` and the context default variables. In our case, this should be enough since `default_project_id` is provided when creating a task :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ea18f34a48d61350f80c79894bef66bf02840bfc/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py#L340-L344

But, a bit before this, the task create method edits the context to replace 'default_project_id' by 'default_create_in_project_id' : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ea18f34a48d61350f80c79894bef66bf02840bfc/addons/project/models/project_task.py#L1102-L1109

So we do not detect that `project_id` has been changed and don't actually add the followers.

We remove the custom 'default_create_in_project_id` context

opw-6026932

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278824
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278353

**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

**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

### 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

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Install Accounting and l10n_be and switch to the Belgian company
2. In the settings, set the discount account (`708000`) on Customer Invoices under "Default Accounts" and enable analytic accounting
3. Go to [Accounting -> Configuration -> Analytic Accounts] and create 4 new accounts with "Project" plan (i.e 1,2,3,4)
4. Create a new invoice with two lines, each having 2 of the analytic accounts with 50% each.
5. Set the price to 1000 and a 10% discount for each line then save.
6. Edit the second line and set the discount to 20%.
7. Open the Journal Items tab

**Issue:**
 - When an invoice contains multiple lines with analytic distributions, changing the discount percentage on any line other than the first fails to correctly update the analytic distribution percentages on the corresponding discount journal items.
- The analytic account distribution splits the percentage evenly across both accounts event if they are not split 50/50

**Why this happens:**
- This occurred because `_compute_discount_allocation_needed` iterated over `self` to populate target changes. When only one line was modified, `self` contains that line only which is correctly updated with the new analytic distribution. Later in the execution in `_sync_dynamic_line`, particularly in https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5a14360705a55f4d91edf39c936d7a5d8573044b/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L2263-L2274 The first line in `computed_needed` is what gets set in res, and subsequent lines only modify the field if it's monetary. So if the second invoice line is the one  updated, it will never override the `analytic_distribution` with the updated values, leaving stale values in that field.
- The code iterated directly over `line.analytic_distribution` dictionary keys (the account IDs) rather than its `.items()`. This caused it to ignore the individual percentage value splits (e.g. 60/40), accumulating the un-weighted full discount amount to each account ID. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5a14360705a55f4d91edf39c936d7a5d8573044b/addons/account/models/account_move_line.py#L1044-L1052

**Fix:**
- Change the processing loop  inside `_compute_discount_allocation_needed` from `self` to `self.move_id.line_ids` to calculate the correct `analytic_distribution` across all records.
- Applying the factored weight ratio (`amount * (percentage / 100.0)`) to `distribution_totals`

opw-6362084

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280302
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275070

As the system now starts to be used by real users, we noticed a few points of improvement that can easily be done in stable and will provide a better UX when interacting with the system.

The payment proof as a field was a consequence of multiple iterations of the system; but it ended up only as a way to input the proof and nothing else.
It is confusing, only allows one proof at a time, and is overall not nice to use.
To improve that, we will remove the field and replace it with an 'Attach Payment Proof' button similar to the expense app, allowing for a better experience.

The similar rental check was checking even if all the related fields were empty. On a database migrating from a previous version, this leads to ALL the rentals to be marked as similar, which isn't ideal.
The same check was also comparing multiple rentals from the same employee as long as they are active. As rentals for an employee cannot overlap, it makes no sense to check this case and cause false positives.

task-6448054

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126764

In this commit:
------------------
- Maintain separate Fiskaly transaction flows for retail (short tx) and restaurant (long tx)
  orders as discussed with the Fiskaly team.
- `Initialize order transactions` with an empty payload when the `first product` is added.
- Start `receipt transactions` with an empty payload when the `first payment line` is added.
- For retail flows, no intermediate order updates are sent to Fiskaly before finalization.
- For restaurant flows, create additional transaction updates during kitchen synchronization.
  Ensure already synchronized products are not resent, and only newly added or updated
  quantities are included in the payload.
- `Finalize order and receipt transactions` with complete order lines and payment details
  when we validate the order.

task: 6208963

Reference:
<img width="1863" height="1285" alt="de_tss_flow" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9140788e-7948-4a08-9f11-27197b22ca8b" />

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120529
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#117526

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#126817
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124969

**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

Issue:
In accrual list reports (Billed Not Received / Invoiced Not Delivered), selecting an "As of" date, opening a line, and returning with the breadcrumb resets the date filter to the default value (today's date)

Steps to reproduce:
1) Open an accrual list report ( Accounting > Audit > Purchases > Bill to receive / Billed Not Received OR Invoices to be issues / invoiced Not delivered)
2) Pick any "As of" date
3) Open any row
4) Click breadcrumb to return to the accrual list
5) Observe the "As of" date has been reset to today's date
To generate some data you could:
create a PO, then upload the bill, validate the receipt, then you'll find it in bills received

Cause:
`AccrualListController.setup()` always initialized state.date with a fresh default date and did not re-put the previously saved `accrual_entry_date` from restored context
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/899f0d45b2ae1dc4e5e06a2e0acb3d006d12d563/account_reports/static/src/views/accrual_list_controller.js#L10-L16

Although `setDate()` stored the selected date in context, `setup()` overwrote the UI state on controller recreation
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/899f0d45b2ae1dc4e5e06a2e0acb3d006d12d563/account_reports/static/src/views/accrual_list_controller.js#L61-L65

Solution:
- Persist `accrual_entry_date` in `AccrualListSearchModel` via `exportState()` / `_importState()`, so the date is restored in search context before the list model loads on breadcrumb navigation.
- Initialize the date picker through `setDate()` in `onWillStart()` instead of hardcoding `DateTime.now()` in `setup()`, so restoration and user changes share the same code path.
- In `setDate()`, reset grouped list caches (`currentGroups` and `groups`) before `root.load()`, because those caches are not keyed on `accrual_entry_date` and would otherwise show stale vendor groups after a date change or breadcrumb restore.

opw-6232263


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126688
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#118669

Currently, an error occurs when user tries to install `website_sale_subscription` after deleting the monthly subscription plan.

Steps to replicate:
- Install `sale_subscription`.
- Open Subscription > Configuration > Recurring Plans.
- Delete the plan named `monthly`.
- Install `website_sale_subscription`.

Error:
```
ValueError: External ID not found in the system: sale_subscription.subscription_plan_month

odoo.tools.convert.ParseError: while parsing /home/odoo/odoo19/enterprise/website_sale_subscription/data/donation_data.xml:16, somewhere inside
<record id="product_recurring_donation_pricing_monthly" model="product.pricelist.item">
            <field name="plan_id" ref="sale_subscription.subscription_plan_month"/>
            <field name="product_tmpl_id" ref="product_recurring_donation"/>
            <field name="fixed_price">1.0</field>
            <field name="pricelist_id" eval="False"/>
        </record>
```

Cause:
- Error is raised when assigning the `Monthly` subscription plan in the `website_sale_subscription` master data because the user has deleted the `Monthly` subscription plan.

Solution:
- As the `plan_id` is not a required field, we can skip assigning the `plan_id` if it the record is not found.

sentry-7441124574

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125649

### 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

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126852
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125497

**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the **Netherlands - SBR** (`l10n_nl_reports_sbr`) and **Netherlands - SBR OB Nummer** (`l10n_nl_reports_sbr_ob_nummer`) modules.
* Create two companies with Dutch localization.
* Go to **Accounting → Configuration → Tax Units** and create a Tax Unit with its own **Tax ID** (e.g. `NL826317558B01`), adding both companies.
* On the main company form, fill in the **Omzetbelastingnummer** field (e.g. `123456782B90`).
* Go to **Accounting → Reporting → Tax Return**, select the Tax Unit in the filter, and click **XBRL → Download XBRL File**.

**Observed behavior:**
* The `<xbrli:identifier>` in the exported XBRL file contains the company's **Omzetbelastingnummer** (`123456782B90`) instead of the Tax Unit's VAT (`826317558B01`).
* The tax authority rejects the return because the identifier does not match the fiscal unity registration.

**Cause:**
* `_get_sbr_identifier()` in `l10n_nl_reports_sbr_ob_nummer` unconditionally returns `self.env.company.l10n_nl_reports_sbr_ob_nummer` before consulting the Tax Unit.
* The `super()` call, which correctly routes to `tax_unit.vat` via `report.get_vat_for_export()`, is only reached when the company field is empty — so the Tax Unit's VAT is never used when a company OB-number is set.

**Fix:**
* When a Tax Unit is active in the report options, delegate immediately to `super()._get_sbr_identifier()`, which resolves `tax_unit.vat` through the existing `get_vat_for_export()` logic.
* The company-level `l10n_nl_reports_sbr_ob_nummer` override is preserved as a fallback for the `company_only` (no Tax Unit) case.

opw-6350840

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126999
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125167

**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

When a user chooses the "Double Opt-in" template (or others using
`_create_records_with_xml_ids`), the system creates records like the
"Confirmed contacts" list and a server action. It also adds an
`ir.model.data` entry for them under the module, but sets
`noupdate=False`.

The problem is that during a module upgrade, Odoo's cleanup process
(`_process_end`) deletes any record marked `noupdate=False` if it
wasn't "reloaded" from a file. Since these records are created
manually in the code and aren't in any XML file, they never get
reloaded, so Odoo just deletes them and the records they point to.

By setting `noupdate=True` when these rows are created, we tell
the system to leave them alone during upgrades. Since these only
exist at runtime and don't have a data file, we don't need to
worry about them being updated later anyway.

The helper was added in
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/fd98660e352512e0b74d91958707687978154833.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install Marketing Automation
2. Go to Campaigns > New and pick the "Double Opt-in" template, then save
3. Confirm the "Confirmed contacts" mailing list and server action exist
4. Go to Apps and Upgrade Marketing Automation
5. Try to find the mailing list and server action again

=> They disappear after the upgrade.

Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6140191)
opw-6140191

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#115444

### 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#127020
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126359

### 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

**Description:**
While loading the budget report, the bad queries are created by 
```def _get_aal_query()``` and ```def _get_pol_query()``` function, makes 
the budget report unusable.

**Root cause:**
Instead of doing a hash join while searching the record,
 the OR statement in the Left Join in the condition 
```(%(bl)s IS NULL OR %(a)s = %(bl)s)``` 
creates a nested for loop that compares everything single aal to bl, 
this causes a significant performance issue as the number of the 
number of check will be the the number aal * bl,
if a database has a 70k aal and 20k bl, both numbers are not large
but it will cause a 70k * 20k search which is more than a billion.

**Fix**:
There are some refactors made in this PR.

_First_, separate out the Q1.
In order to find the aal that has no bl connects to it. 
Doing a search to find the aals that have bl and then subtract them from all aals.

_Second_, Instead of doing a nested loop for by using
 ```(%(bl)s IS NULL OR %(a)s = %(bl)s)```, 
originally we will have do something like
```
JOIN budget_line bl
  ON (bl.x_plan2_id IS NULL OR aal.x_plan2_id = bl.x_plan2_id)
 AND (bl.x_plan3_id IS NULL OR aal.x_plan3_id = bl.x_plan3_id)
 AND (bl.x_plan4_id IS NULL OR aal.x_plan4_id = bl.x_plan4_id)
```
Assuming each bl has three plans ```x_plan2_id```, ```x_plan3_id```, ```x_plan4_id```

Grouping the bl base on whether a specific plan is set, (i.e. shapes)
we can skip the ```IS NULL OR``` because we already know which plan
 is null and do the hash join directly.

For example, the shapes will be a dictionary with a key of a tuple of booleans
based on whether a plan is set or not and the value is a list of bl_id.

```
{
    (True, False, False): [1, 2],
    (False, True, True):  [3, 4],
    (False, False, False): [5],
}
```

we can end up doing something like

```
JOIN budget_line bl
 ON bl.id = ANY(ARRAY[3,4])
 AND aal.x_plan3_id = bl.x_plan3_id AND aal.x_plan4_id = bl.x_plan4_id
```
which is way more faster.

---
The benchmark is made locally from this client's database which contains
 69k aal, 23k bl, 6829 pol and 3 plans for aal and bl.

|Record count                                      |Time before|Time after|
|--------------------------------------------------|-----------------|---------------|
|69k aal, 23k bl, 6829 pol, 3 plans    |70.04s         |4.6s            |

Dalibo:

Before: 
Month-over-month grand total by company:
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/8h3d4e89aaf9f3d4
Overall grand total by company:
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/445g1f9caf4923e2
Month-over-month grand total by plan: 
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/53a138ca50b2a7c4
Overall grand total by plan: 
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/hdbe169ddc7g5785

After: 
Month-over-month grand total by company:
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/hcc86c801e6872bf
Overall grand total by company:
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/69b2421a3581f98h
Month-over-month grand total by plan:
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/a88f398bbbch3148
Overall grand total by plan: 
https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/1gg749ae7ab1553c

opw-6345552

Steps to reproduce:
- Create a sale order with a down payment term.
- Invoice the down payment (down payment invoice A).
- Credit that down payment invoice directly (credit note A), without reconciling it with anything else.
- Generate the FatturaPA XML for credit note A.
- Observe that DatiFattureCollegate lists both down payment invoice A and credit note A itself, instead of only down payment invoice A. On an order with several down payment invoices/credit notes over time, every one of them is listed instead of just the document the current credit note actually reverses.

Cause of the issue:
_l10n_it_edi_export_data built downpayment_moves from self.invoice_line_ids._get_downpayment_lines().move_id with no filtering. _get_downpayment_lines() (sale override) returns every invoice line ever created against the same down payment sale order line, across the whole life of the order, not just the invoice the current document actually relates to. The template renders DatiFattureCollegate for every one of those moves unconditionally, on top of the already-correct reversed_entry_id/reconciled_moves fallback, including the current document itself.

Solution:
Restrict downpayment_moves to lines with a negative price_subtotal, mirroring the existing down payment deduction-line detection a few lines above, and explicitly exclude the current document. This limits DatiFattureCollegate's down payment entries to the case they are meant for: a final invoice actually deducting a previously invoiced down payment.

opw-6429716

**Steps to Reproduce:**

1. Send a message to Marc demo with Mitchell admin or vice-versa, read the message from reciever's side.
2. Click on seen-by indicator from sender's side, make sure the dialog appears and then Press `'ESC'`.
3. Chat window closes whereas the dialog should have closed.

Since #169737, pressing 'esc' on the seen-by dialog closes the chat window instead of the dialog.

The chat window's root element has a keydown handler that closes the window on `'escape'`, and catches focus by default whenever something non-focusable is clicked inside it (e.g. the seen-by indicator). The seen-by dialog's content had no focusable element, so it never grabbed focus for itself, leaving focus on the chat window. Pressing 'escape' therefore closed the chat window instead of the dialog.

This commit fixes the issue by adding tabindex on the template, letting the dialog grab focus like other dialogs/popovers already do, so `'escape'` is handled by the dialog first.

task-4895004