Wednesday, August 12, 2026
13 changes · saas-18.3
Resolved issues and error corrections
French VAT reimbursement declarations now include the bank account holder's name in the required account information. This helps ensure declaration 3519 contains the information needed for successful processing by authorities.
Original PR description
For reimbursement declarations, the name of the holder of the account is required This commits adds holder's name to the account data zone no-task-id Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127554
Submitting Australian Single Touch Payroll records without payslips or employees now shows a clear validation message instead of causing an unexpected error. This helps payroll users understand what information is required before sending data to the ATO.
Original PR description
When submitting payroll data to the ATO from an STP record without any payslips or employees, a traceback is raised. Steps to reproduce the error: - Install ``l10n_au_hr_payroll_account`` module -…
When submitting payroll data to the ATO from an STP record without any payslips or employees, a traceback is raised. Steps to reproduce the error: - Install ``l10n_au_hr_payroll_account`` module - Switch to ``My australian Company`` - Go to Payroll > Configuration > Settings > In Australian Localization, Set BMS ID > Set STP Responsible and his date of birth - Go to Payroll > Reporting > Single Touch Payroll > Create a new record > Set Payment Date > Submit to ATO > Sign & Submit to ATO Traceback: ```py IndexError: tuple index out of range ``` https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b0e48baaf99bdc4faefd2ffdd3bd5637fb548593/l10n_au_hr_payroll_account/models/l10n_au_stp.py#L228-L233 The traceback occurs because ``_get_fiscal_year_start()`` assumes that the STP record always contains at least one payslip or one employee. When these recordsets are empty, indexing the first element raises an IndexError. Solution: This commit validates that the required payslips or employees are present before the submission and raises a validation error instead of a traceback. Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124096
The selection options for l10n_id_coretax_add_info_07/08 and l10n_id_coretax_facility_info_07 were swapped: the "additional information" fields showed facility stamp text and vice versa. Also add the UoM codes and new kode faktur 07 additional info/facility stamp options published by DJP on 2026-01-26. task-6434742 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281096
Original PR description
The selection options for l10n_id_coretax_add_info_07/08 and l10n_id_coretax_facility_info_07 were swapped: the "additional information" fields showed facility stamp text and vice versa. Also add the UoM codes and new kode faktur 07 additional info/facility stamp options published by DJP on 2026-01-26. task-6434742 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281096
Before this commit, `waitStoreFetch` returns before the answer is in the store: right after `waitStoreFetch("channels_as_member")`, the store holds no record for a channel that answer carries, on a hundred runs out of a hundred. A test that then asserts on the fetched data depends on timing. This happens because `listenStoreFetch` steps from the `onRpc` callback, which runs before the route is served. The `microTick` at the end of `waitStoreFetch` is meant to cover the rest of the round trip,
Original PR description
Before this commit, `waitStoreFetch` returns before the answer is in the store: right after `waitStoreFetch("channels_as_member")`, the store holds no record for a channel that answer carries, on a hundred runs out of a hundred. A test that then asserts on the fetched data depends on timing.
This happens because `listenStoreFetch` steps from the `onRpc` callback, which runs before the route is served. The `microTick` at the end of `waitStoreFetch` is meant to cover the rest of the round trip, but the answer only reaches the store six microtasks later.
This commit steps from `Store.fetchStoreData` instead, whose promise resolves once the answer is in the store, and drops the tick. The `onRpc` option keeps its route hooks, as tests use it to delay a request.#### Issue When manually adding component lines in the subcontracting Record Production flow, extra stock move lines can remain in the database without a linked stock move. Those lines have no move_id, so their related state is empty. They can later be selected by stock reservation code and cause validation errors when processing the transfer. #### Steps to reproduce 1. Create a subcontracted product. 2. Confirm a subcontracting receipt/purchase flow for that product. 3. Open the s
Original PR description
#### Issue When manually adding component lines in the subcontracting Record Production flow, extra stock move lines can remain in the database without a linked stock move. Those lines have no…
#### Issue When manually adding component lines in the subcontracting Record Production flow, extra stock move lines can remain in the database without a linked stock move. Those lines have no move_id, so their related state is empty. They can later be selected by stock reservation code and cause validation errors when processing the transfer. #### Steps to reproduce 1. Create a subcontracted product. 2. Confirm a subcontracting receipt/purchase flow for that product. 3. Open the subcontracting Record Production popup. 4. Remove an existing component line. 5. Add a new component line for another storable product available at the subcontractor location. 6. Save/record the production. 7. Check stock.move.line records , Inventory > History > Group By Status. An extra stock move line is left with no move_id. #### Root cause The inverse of `mrp.production.move_line_raw_ids` already collects and deletes move lines detached from existing raw moves. However, when the user adds a new component product, the inverse creates a new additional raw move. Creating that raw move can also create reserved move lines. The inverse then replaces `move.move_line_ids` with the user-entered lines, but it did not collect the newly created reserved lines before replacing them. Those reserved lines were detached from the move and left in the database as orphan stock move lines. #### Fix Apply the same cleanup logic to newly created additional raw moves: collect their auto-created move lines before replacing `move_line_ids`, then unlink those detached lines at the end of the inverse. opw-6304649 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276235
Steps: - Install `account_peppol` module. - Set `Peppol` compatible country and related details - Go to my/account page. Issue: - Peppol related details always displayed on `my/account` page even though user select different invoice sending method like: `By Email`. Casue: - selector to manage visibility of Peppol related details in `my/account` is wrong and because of that those fields always display. Probably because https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/195764 and backport of this https
Original PR description
Steps: - Install `account_peppol` module. - Set `Peppol` compatible country and related details - Go to my/account page. Issue: - Peppol related details always displayed on `my/account` page even…
Steps: - Install `account_peppol` module. - Set `Peppol` compatible country and related details - Go to my/account page. Issue: - Peppol related details always displayed on `my/account` page even though user select different invoice sending method like: `By Email`. Casue: - selector to manage visibility of Peppol related details in `my/account` is wrong and because of that those fields always display. Probably because https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/195764 and backport of this https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/198327 merged at same time. Fix: - Update selector to fix this ### [FIX] account_peppol: fix error when setting wrong endpoint Steps: - Install `account_peppol` module. - Set `Peppol` compatible country and related details. - Go to my/account page. - Set some wrong Peppol value for `Peppol e-Address (EAS)` or `Peppol Endpoint` or `Electronic format`. Issue: - Not able to save those details without any error message on address page and getting error on console `Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'classList')`. Casue: - In this PR https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/190312 when adapting portal page we set not existing fields in `invalid_fields` details and because of that it can't find related fields on address page and don't allow to save details without raising proper error message. Fix: - Updated `invalid_fields` values to properly target them ### [FIX] account_peppol: fix display issue for peppol related fields in address
Automatically update the ruff config to the latest version generated on runbot
Original PR description
Automatically update the ruff config to the latest version generated on runbot
Steps to reproduce: - 1. In the website editor, open the portal "My Account" page and, in the Customize panel, disable the "Timesheets" option. 2. As a portal user, open My Account > Tasks for a project whose tasks have allocated time and logged timesheets. 3. Look at the task list, then open one of those tasks. Issue: - The task list still shows the per-group "Total: spent / allocated", and the task detail page still shows "Allocated Time", even though timesheets are hidden in the port
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce: - 1. In the website editor, open the portal "My Account" page and, in the Customize panel, disable the "Timesheets" option. 2. As a portal user, open My Account > Tasks for a project whose tasks have allocated time and logged timesheets. 3. Look at the task list, then open one of those tasks. Issue: - The task list still shows the per-group "Total: spent / allocated", and the task detail page still shows "Allocated Time", even though timesheets are hidden in the portal. Fix: - - Add `_show_portal_timesheets()` to the condition of the list "Total" column. - Gate the `portal_my_task_allocated_hours` block on `_show_portal_timesheets()` in the task detail page. task-6140807
During the backport we discovered a programming error in `_get_peppol_document_params`. The super function can return `None` values for both `edi_user` and `document`. This can lead to a traceback when the variables are used. We do not have any known issues in 18.0 or higher versions. (Probably because the move send was heavily refactored.) But better safe than sorry. It could maybe happen with the batch sending or in case the "surrounding" logic is refactored in the future. task-None
Original PR description
During the backport we discovered a programming error in `_get_peppol_document_params`. The super function can return `None` values for both `edi_user` and `document`. This can lead to a traceback when the variables are used. We do not have any known issues in 18.0 or higher versions. (Probably because the move send was heavily refactored.) But better safe than sorry. It could maybe happen with the batch sending or in case the "surrounding" logic is refactored in the future. task-None Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279317
***Steps to reproduce*:** * Install the `l10n_din5008` module. * Set up a German Company and set the fiscal location to Germany. * Select the German company and create a new Purchase Journal. * Enable **Self Billing** for the journal. * Create a vendor bill and print the PDF. ***Observed behavior*:** * The printed document displays the regular vendor bill header instead of the self-billing header. ***Cause*:** * The condition required to display the self-billing header was mi
Original PR description
***Steps to reproduce*:** * Install the `l10n_din5008` module. * Set up a German Company and set the fiscal location to Germany. * Select the German company and create a new Purchase Journal. * Enable **Self Billing** for the journal. * Create a vendor bill and print the PDF. ***Observed behavior*:** * The printed document displays the regular vendor bill header instead of the self-billing header. ***Cause*:** * The condition required to display the self-billing header was missing from the report template if self-billing is enabled. ***Fix*:** * Add the missing condition so that the self-billing header is displayed when **Self Billing** is enabled on the journal. * For reference, here is the [Document](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/ustg_1980/__14.html) link. Ticket [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6281066) opw-6281066
Steps to reproduce ================== 1. Configure a delivery method with free shipping above a threshold 2. Add a product to the cart above that threshold, select the delivery method and leave the cart unfinished 3. Lower the product price below the threshold 4. Recover the cart and confirm the order from /shop/checkout => The product prices are refreshed, but shipping stays free although the new total is below the threshold. Root cause ========== Since [1], nothing re-rates th
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce ================== 1. Configure a delivery method with free shipping above a threshold 2. Add a product to the cart above that threshold, select the delivery method and leave the…
Steps to reproduce ================== 1. Configure a delivery method with free shipping above a threshold 2. Add a product to the cart above that threshold, select the delivery method and leave the cart unfinished 3. Lower the product price below the threshold 4. Recover the cart and confirm the order from /shop/checkout => The product prices are refreshed, but shipping stays free although the new total is below the threshold. Root cause ========== Since [1], nothing re-rates the carrier after /shop/confirm_order refreshes the cart prices: the delivery method is selected before the confirmation. In 17.0, the payment page auto-clicked the selected carrier on load, which re-rated the shipping cost and masked the issue. Fix === Re-rate the selected delivery method in `shop_confirm_order` after the prices have been recomputed, as `_cart_update` already does. [1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8e2b6cede55b51f7ccdbe7601aa7e6035fd6f9fe opw-6383849 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276905
Miscellaneous changes
- Compute the standard durations for all French leaves in a single `_get_durations()` call instead of recomputing them for each leave. - Reuse the precomputed duration mapping while calculating the French legal duration for each leave. - Keep the existing French-specific duration calculation unchanged, including public holidays, company calendar, date extension, and half-day handling. This avoids repeated ORM computations when processing multiple French leaves in a batch an
Original PR description
- Compute the standard durations for all French leaves in a single `_get_durations()` call instead of recomputing them for each leave. - Reuse the precomputed duration mapping while calculating the…
- Compute the standard durations for all French leaves in a single `_get_durations()` call instead of recomputing them for each leave. - Reuse the precomputed duration mapping while calculating the French legal duration for each leave. - Keep the existing French-specific duration calculation unchanged, including public holidays, company calendar, date extension, and half-day handling. This avoids repeated ORM computations when processing multiple French leaves in a batch and significantly improves the performance of leave duration computation. Performance testing was performed using the `hr.leave.employee.report` introduced in 19.1, which calls `_get_durations()` on a large batch of virtual leaves. Performance testing on a database containing 677 leaves, including 298 French leaves: | Metric | Before | After | |------------------------------------|-----------------|-------------| | Standard duration computations | 298 | 1 | | Total `_get_durations()` | >169s (timeout) | ~24s | not specific to the employee report and benefits any caller that invokes _get_durations() on a larger batch. **opw-6421323** --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281165
In `settleSO`, two per-line bottlenecks were addressed: 1. `has_valued_move_ids` was called once per order line via a separate RPC, causing N sequential HTTP round-trips. It is now computed server-side inside `read_converted`, which is already called once for all lines. 2. `addLineToCurrentOrder` was awaited per line, yielding to the event loop each iteration and triggering a full Owl re-render for every line. Lines are now created directly, batching all mutations into a single render. `re
Original PR description
In `settleSO`, two per-line bottlenecks were addressed: 1. `has_valued_move_ids` was called once per order line via a separate RPC, causing N sequential HTTP round-trips. It is now computed server-side inside `read_converted`, which is already called once for all lines. 2. `addLineToCurrentOrder` was awaited per line, yielding to the event loop each iteration and triggering a full Owl re-render for every line. Lines are now created directly, batching all mutations into a single render. `recomputeOrderData()` is called once after the loop. `updatePrograms` is moved to a `pos_sale_loyalty` patch on `settleSO` so the loyalty concern belongs to the bridge module. opw-6319922 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271742