Tuesday, August 18, 2026
12 changes · saas-18.3
Resolved issues and error corrections
DIN 5008 PDF documents now show dates in the expected day.month.year format for Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, regardless of the user's language settings. This prevents invoices, quotations, purchase orders, follow-ups, and field service worksheets from displaying confusing or non-compliant date formats.
Original PR description
* = din5008_account_followup, din5008_industry_fsm **Steps to reproduce:** * Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`) * Set the document layout to **DIN…
* = din5008_account_followup, din5008_industry_fsm
**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`)
* Set the document layout to **DIN 5008** and generate any PDF report (invoice, quotation, purchase order, etc.).
**Observed behavior (date format):**
* All dates in the information block (Invoice Date, Due Date, Delivery Date, Order Date, etc.) are rendered in `yyyy-mm-dd` format instead of the expected `dd.MM.yyyy` format used in DE, AT, and CH.
**Cause (date format):**
* All `t-options="{'widget': 'date'}"` directives across the DIN 5008 template family rely on the active user's language locale for date formatting. If the user language is not `de_DE`, dates render in the locale's default format (e.g. `yyyy-mm-dd` for `en_US`).
**Fix (date format):**
* Add `'format': 'dd.MM.yyyy'` explicitly to all `t-options` date widgets across all DIN 5008 report templates (`l10n_din5008`, `l10n_din5008_sale`, `l10n_din5008_purchase`, `l10n_din5008_sale_subscription`, `l10n_din5008_repair`, `l10n_din5008_account_followup`, `l10n_din5008_industry_fsm`).
* This is correct for all three countries using DIN 5008 (DE, AT, CH), which all follow the `dd.MM.yyyy` convention.
opw-6392649
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126006Peruvian accounting reports now use the currency rate already saved on each accounting entry instead of recalculating it during report generation. This avoids small rounding differences and helps produce more accurate official reporting figures.
Original PR description
Previously, the `_get_ple_report_data` method computed the currency rate when called. Since the calculation was based on the entry totals, it was prone to rounding errors. This PR makes it use the rate stored in the entry itself. This should lead to more accurate results. opw-6411322 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126882
This fix prevents the incoming invoice journal from being cleared for companies that cannot receive Peppol documents through the Documents app, such as French companies using electronic invoicing. Incoming Peppol documents are now kept as vendor bills in the required journal instead of being incorrectly routed to Documents.
Original PR description
Peppol documents can be received in a journal or in the Documents app (peppol_reception_mode). Some companies cannot use Documents: _peppol_allows_document_reception() returns False and the journal…
Peppol documents can be received in a journal or in the Documents app (peppol_reception_mode). Some companies cannot use Documents: _peppol_allows_document_reception() returns False and the journal stays required. This is the case of French companies (via l10n_fr_pdp). The onchange of the settings and the import did not check this method. So on a French company with the mode set to 'documents': - the Settings cleared the journal on each opening, while it was still required - the incoming documents were saved in Documents instead of vendor bills Steps to reproduce: - Create a Belgian company, with a purchase journal, and register it on Peppol as receiver - Set the reception mode to "Receive in Documents" - Change the fiscal position to France, and install l10n_fr_pdp, the Peppol part is replaced by "French Electronic Invoicing", so the radio button is not visible anymore, but the company still has peppol_reception_mode == 'documents'. - Open the Settings again: the field "Incoming Invoices Journal" is empty. opw-6429691
- Added the BolloVirtuale in the Simplified invoice template - Now it's possible to force the Simplified format on exported invoice when the `l10n_it_document_type` is set to a simplified one - Factored the Italian partner recognition (_l10n_it_edi_is_italian) - Added a check on the invoice, no simplified format for non-domestic / PA partners Task [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6226436) task-6226436 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274493
Original PR description
- Added the BolloVirtuale in the Simplified invoice template - Now it's possible to force the Simplified format on exported invoice when the `l10n_it_document_type` is set to a simplified one - Factored the Italian partner recognition (_l10n_it_edi_is_italian) - Added a check on the invoice, no simplified format for non-domestic / PA partners Task [link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6226436) task-6226436 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274493
**Steps to reproduce:** * Create a **French** parent company and a branch. * Activate **Electronic Invoicing (PDP)** for the parent company. * Switch to the branch while keeping both the **parent company** and the **branch** selected in the company switcher. * Go to **Settings → French Localization → Activate Electronic Invoicing**. * Activate **Electronic Invoicing (PDP)** for the branch. * Select the **Participate in the pilot phase** checkbox and try to save settings. **Observed beha
Original PR description
**Steps to reproduce:** * Create a **French** parent company and a branch. * Activate **Electronic Invoicing (PDP)** for the parent company. * Switch to the branch while keeping both the **parent…
**Steps to reproduce:**
* Create a **French** parent company and a branch.
* Activate **Electronic Invoicing (PDP)** for the parent company.
* Switch to the branch while keeping both the **parent company** and the **branch** selected in the company switcher.
* Go to **Settings → French Localization → Activate Electronic Invoicing**.
* Activate **Electronic Invoicing (PDP)** for the branch.
* Select the **Participate in the pilot phase** checkbox and try to save settings.
**Observed behavior:**
* A traceback occurs with the error: `psycopg2.errors.SyntaxError: syntax error at or near ")"` on `IN ()` in the SQL query inside `_force_update_l10n_fr_f10_moves`.
**Cause:**
* `_force_update_l10n_fr_f10_moves` searches for receivable/payable accounts using `company_ids IN companies.ids`.
* A branch company has no accounts assigned directly to it — accounts belong to the parent company — so the search returns an empty list.
* Passing an empty tuple to `IN %(account_ids)s` generates `IN ()`, which is invalid PostgreSQL syntax.
**Fix:**
* Replace `('company_ids', 'in', companies.ids)` with
`('company_ids', 'parent_of', companies.ids)` in the account search
inside `_force_update_l10n_fr_f10_moves`.
* This ensures that accounts owned by a parent company are correctly
found when the given companies are branches, since branch companies
inherit their parent's chart of accounts.
opw-6394650
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277232When clicking on a title in the TOC, we auto-scroll to that section of the HTML, allowing users to read that part. Since [1], scrollIntoView is replaced to consider top-aligned sticky elements. As a result, instead of scrolling to make it comfortable to read the section, it stops as soon as the title is visible. Unless you are really attentive at the bottom of the screen, it can look like the scrolling did not work. This commit computes the appropriate offset to make the TOC heading mo
Original PR description
When clicking on a title in the TOC, we auto-scroll to that section of the HTML, allowing users to read that part. Since [1], scrollIntoView is replaced to consider top-aligned sticky elements. As a result, instead of scrolling to make it comfortable to read the section, it stops as soon as the title is visible. Unless you are really attentive at the bottom of the screen, it can look like the scrolling did not work. This commit computes the appropriate offset to make the TOC heading more visible after scrolling. [1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/f5cf8565e7d09edd3a29fd95537381fb70d75785 Task-6394193
`cbc:RoundingAmount` was the sum of `raw_total_excluded` over the non-fixed taxes plus the sum of `raw_tax_amount` over all the taxes, so the base of the line was counted once per non-fixed tax, inflating the line total. `cbc:TaxableAmount` was taken from the tax details of each grouping key, which is the base of that specific tax not the net amount of the line expected by JoFotara. Both amounts are now read from the base line tax details (`raw_total_included` and `raw_total_excluded`), so
Original PR description
`cbc:RoundingAmount` was the sum of `raw_total_excluded` over the non-fixed taxes plus the sum of `raw_tax_amount` over all the taxes, so the base of the line was counted once per non-fixed tax, inflating the line total. `cbc:TaxableAmount` was taken from the tax details of each grouping key, which is the base of that specific tax not the net amount of the line expected by JoFotara. Both amounts are now read from the base line tax details (`raw_total_included` and `raw_total_excluded`), so they describe the line itself regardless of the number of taxes set on it. The document level `cbc:TaxableAmount` keeps using the aggregated tax details. Even tho the problems were hidden because in Jordan, a line wouldn't have more than 1 percent tax + 1 fixed tax, it emerged during the development of the fix in this PR: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/279335 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281262
the field l10n_sa_edi_is_production was introduced in 19.0, so it was never supposed to survive the backport to 17.0 Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses: Current behavior before PR: Desired behavior after PR is merged: --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282232
Original PR description
the field l10n_sa_edi_is_production was introduced in 19.0, so it was never supposed to survive the backport to 17.0 Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses: Current behavior before PR: Desired behavior after PR is merged: --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282232
Steps to Reproduce: 1. Confirm a Sales Order with one line -> creates delivery P1. Validate P1 with date_done = Day_A. 2. Create an invoice from the SO and post it -> invoice.delivery_date = Day_A. 3. Add a new line to the same SO -> creates delivery P2. 4. Validate P2 with date_done = Day_B, where Day_B is earlier than Day_A. Issue: The already-posted invoice's `delivery_date` silently changes from Day_A to Day_B after step 4, even though nobody edited the invoice. This only happens w
Original PR description
Steps to Reproduce: 1. Confirm a Sales Order with one line -> creates delivery P1. Validate P1 with date_done = Day_A. 2. Create an invoice from the SO and post it -> invoice.delivery_date = Day_A.…
Steps to Reproduce: 1. Confirm a Sales Order with one line -> creates delivery P1. Validate P1 with date_done = Day_A. 2. Create an invoice from the SO and post it -> invoice.delivery_date = Day_A. 3. Add a new line to the same SO -> creates delivery P2. 4. Validate P2 with date_done = Day_B, where Day_B is earlier than Day_A. Issue: The already-posted invoice's `delivery_date` silently changes from Day_A to Day_B after step 4, even though nobody edited the invoice. This only happens when a delivery validated after posting has an earlier `date_done` than what was already used. Root Cause: `account.move.delivery_date (sale_stock)` is computed in `_compute_delivery_date()`, which depends on `sale.order.effective_date.effective_date` is itself computed as the earliest `date_done` among all done, facing deliveries on the order. Neither compute method checks whether the invoice is posted, so validating P2 triggers a chain reaction: the delivery is saved -> the sale order recalculates -> the invoice recalculates -> delivery_date gets overwritten on an already-posted invoice. `sale_stock` also marks `delivery_date` as protected, but this protection only works when the invoice itself is saved (write/create). Here, the change starts from saving the delivery (stock.picking), which never goes through the invoice's save method, so the protection never kicks in. `delivery_date` is also not on the list of fields Odoo normally blocks from editing after posting. Fix: `_compute_delivery_date()` now splits invoices into posted and non-posted before running. Non-posted invoices work exactly as before. Posted invoices are skipped from the sync and simply keep their current value instead of taking the newly calculated one. `sale.order.effective_date` itself is untouched only its effect on an already-posted invoice is blocked. Result: Once an invoice is posted, its `delivery_date` now stays fixed no matter what happens with later deliveries on the same sale order. `effective_date` keeps updating normally either way, confirming the fix only affects the invoice. Verified with both a script and a manual UI test. opw-6409171 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280978
Before this commit, clicking a composer suggestion could leave the composer with the typed search instead of the selected name, as in the test "Mention a partner with special character (e.g. apostrophe ')" on runbot: Failed to find 1 of ".o-mail-Composer-input" with value "..." (Timeout of 10 seconds). Found 0 instead. This happens because NavigableList looks up the clicked option by index in its current props, while the item clicked comes from the last render. Typing "@" lists the two mem
Original PR description
Before this commit, clicking a composer suggestion could leave the composer with the typed search instead of the selected name, as in the test "Mention a partner with special character (e.g. apostrophe ')" on runbot: Failed to find 1 of ".o-mail-Composer-input" with value "..." (Timeout of 10 seconds). Found 0 instead. This happens because NavigableList looks up the clicked option by index in its current props, while the item clicked comes from the last render. Typing "@" lists the two members of the channel and typing "Pyn" drops one of them: owl assigns the filtered options one frame before it patches the list, so a click in between looks up index 1 in a list of one option, finds nothing and returns. This commit passes the rendered option to the click handler, keeping the index lookup as a fallback so that the signature stays the same on a stable version. https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/946154 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282897
## Description When a CI/NIE number fails the check digit validation, the raised error suggests `3:402.010-2 or 93:402.010-1 (CI or NIE)` as the expected format. This is misleading for two reasons: - The colon notation comes from Uruware's technical manual and is not how identity card numbers are written in Uruguay: users write `3.402.010-1` or plain digits (`34020101`). Real users facing the error keep reformatting a number whose check digit is simply wrong, believing the problem is the forma
Original PR description
## Description When a CI/NIE number fails the check digit validation, the raised error suggests `3:402.010-2 or 93:402.010-1 (CI or NIE)` as the expected format. This is misleading for two reasons: -…
## Description When a CI/NIE number fails the check digit validation, the raised error suggests `3:402.010-2 or 93:402.010-1 (CI or NIE)` as the expected format. This is misleading for two reasons: - The colon notation comes from Uruware's technical manual and is not how identity card numbers are written in Uruguay: users write `3.402.010-1` or plain digits (`34020101`). Real users facing the error keep reformatting a number whose check digit is simply wrong, believing the problem is the format. - The CI example shown is itself an **invalid** number: the check digit of `3.402.010` is `1`, not `2` — the module's own test suite (`l10n_uy/tests/test_check_vat.py`) uses `3:402.010-2` as an invalid sample. This was reported by an Uruguayan eCommerce user who lost sales because buyers interpreted the message as requiring an unusual format that does not exist in Uruguay. ## Change Replace the examples with valid numbers written in the notations actually used in Uruguay, and clarify that separators are optional — which is exactly what `_l10n_uy_ci_nie_is_valid()` already accepts (it strips `:. ,-` before checking the verification digit): ``` 3.402.010-1 or 34020101 (CI), 93.402.010-1 (NIE); dots and dash are optional ``` Only the `expected_format` string changes; the validation logic is untouched. Existing tests only assert the fixed part of the message (`The CI/NIE number.*does not seem to be valid`), so they are unaffected. Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282489
* = de, din5008, din5008_purchase, din5008_repair, din5008_sale **Steps to reproduce:** * Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`) * Set the document layout to **DIN 5008** and generate any PDF report (invoice, quotation, purchase order, etc.). **Observed behavior (date format):** * All dates in the information block (Invoice Date, Due Date, Delivery Date, Order Date, etc.) are rendered in `yyyy-mm-dd` format instead of the expected `dd
Original PR description
* = de, din5008, din5008_purchase, din5008_repair, din5008_sale **Steps to reproduce:** * Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`) * Set the document…
* = de, din5008, din5008_purchase, din5008_repair, din5008_sale
**Steps to reproduce:**
* Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`)
* Set the document layout to **DIN 5008** and generate any PDF report (invoice, quotation, purchase order, etc.).
**Observed behavior (date format):**
* All dates in the information block (Invoice Date, Due Date, Delivery Date, Order Date, etc.) are rendered in `yyyy-mm-dd` format instead of the expected `dd.MM.yyyy` format used in DE, AT, and CH.
**Observed behavior (commercial register):**
* The footer always shows `HRB-Nr.:` regardless of whether the company has a commercial register entry.
* The abbreviation `HRB-Nr.:` appears even for Austrian and Swiss companies, where the commercial register number is a German-specific concept.
* In the company form view, the field is labeled generically as "Company ID" instead of "Commercial Register Number" for German companies.
**Cause (date format):**
* All `t-options="{'widget': 'date'}"` directives across the DIN 5008 template family rely on the active user's language locale for date formatting. If the user language is not `de_DE`, dates render in the locale's default format (e.g. `yyyy-mm-dd` for `en_US`).
**Cause (commercial register):**
* The footer renders `company.company_registry` unconditionally with no country guard and no label.
**Fix (date format):**
* Add `'format': 'dd.MM.yyyy'` explicitly to all `t-options` date widgets across all DIN 5008 report templates (`l10n_din5008`, `l10n_din5008_sale`, `l10n_din5008_purchase`, `l10n_din5008_sale_subscription`, `l10n_din5008_repair`, `l10n_din5008_account_followup`, `l10n_din5008_industry_fsm`).
* This is correct for all three countries using DIN 5008 (DE, AT, CH), which all follow the `dd.MM.yyyy` convention.
**Fix (commercial register):**
* Remove the hardcoded `HRB-Nr.:` label from the footer and instead render `company.partner_id.company_registry_label` (which is country-aware).
* Update the duplicate contact warning message to use the country-aware label via `company.partner_id.company_registry_label`, backed by a new `_get_company_registry_labels` override in l10n_de that registers `Commercial Register Number` for `DE`.
* In the company form view (`l10n_de`), hide the generic "Company ID" field for German companies and show a relabeled instance with `string="Commercial Register Number"` instead.
opw-6392649
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279085