Doing an euclidean division on floats with the native operators is unreliable: because of IEEE-754 representation errors, `value1 % value2` can return a spurious remainder (e.g. `50.4 % 16.8 == 16.799999999999997` instead of 0.0) and `int(value1 / value2)` can truncate the quotient one step too low (e.g. `int(0.3 / 0.1) == 2` instead of 3). `float_div` returns the `(quotient, remainder)` pair free of those errors.

The key is to never run a lossy `%` or `//` on the raw floats. Instead both operands are first snapped onto the precision grid with `float_round` and then scaled to integers: since a grid-snapped value is a multiple of `rounding`, dividing it by `rounding` counts how many grid steps it spans. That division is still noisy (`4.35 / 0.05 == 86.99999999999999`), so the result is passed through `builtins.round` to coerce it to the exact integer step count. The euclidean division itself is then a plain integer `divmod`, which is exact, and the remainder is scaled back to real units. This is why the correction is applied to the inputs and not to the output: rounding the result of a native `%` would only round an already-corrupt value, and would still misreport the quotient in the corner cases the util exists to handle.

Dividing by `rounding` is meaningful for any precision, not only powers of ten: the grid step can be `0.05`, `0.25`, `0.5`, `0.03`, ... and `value / step` counts the steps in every case. This mirrors the normalize/denormalize scheme `float_round` already uses internally.

The util shares `float_round`'s inherent limitation: the scaled step count must stay representable as an exact `float` integer, so exactness is lost past ~2**53 grid steps (extreme magnitudes at a fine precision). This is the IEEE-754 double-precision ceiling and is well outside any realistic quantity or price range.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281058
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277160

On a database that was not created with demo data, registering for Peppol using the "Odoo Demo ID" identification fails instead of activating the local demo/training registration. The registration wizard correctly shows "Demo" as the EDI mode once that identifier is selected, but submitting the registration still reaches out to the real Peppol Access Point, which the wizard cannot connect to, so the registration is blocked.

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Create a new database without demo data (e.g. a regular Odoo Online database, not a /trial one)
* Install Accounting, open the Peppol registration wizard
* Select "Odoo Demo ID" as the Electronic Address Scheme and fill in the other required fields
* Click on Register

> Observation:
The wizard displays "Demo" as the EDI mode, yet registering raises "Failed to connect to Odoo Peppol Proxy." Manually creating the system parameter `account_peppol.edi.mode` with the value "demo" makes the registration succeed, but that parameter is only ever set automatically when the module's demo data is loaded.

Why the fix:
------------
The wizard's displayed `edi_mode` correctly resolves to "demo" for the Odoo Demo ID EAS, but `handle_demo` - which decides whether `_can_connect`/`_create_connection` run against the local mock or the real Peppol proxy - recomputed the mode itself without passing that EAS along, so it could only detect demo mode via the system parameter or an already existing proxy user. Made `handle_demo` pass the record's own `peppol_eas` as `temporary_eas`, aligning its detection with what the wizard already displays.

opw-6448276

Steps to reproduce:
- Make sure you have 2 or more languages installed
- Install events and website app
- For the website, apply the languages you have in settings
- Make sure website default language is different from backend language
- Create an event
- Go to the event's website page through the smart button
- Switch the language of the frontend to one that is different from backend
- Translate (alter) the description for this language
- Click on the outlook icon to download the ics

Current Behavior:
The ics will contain a description based on the backend's chosen language

Expected Behavior:
The ics will contain a description based on the website's chosen language.
If there's no website, it will use the browser's language

Clarification:
The current behavior is confusing for users as they will expect the ics to match
the description of the current webpage which is dependent on the frontend's
selected language. This current behavior also contradicts the google calendar
behavior which grabs the description based on the frontend's selected language.

The endpoints for retrieving the ics file now utilize the website=True flag to
take advantage of IrHttp._match which will automatically set the context
language to be the frontend's rather than the backend language. We want
the ics file to be in the frontend language for visual consistency. Also,
send_email_reminder function does not require with context for this reason

opw-6235320

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280520
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271968

**Steps to reproduce**
- Open any MO
- Click on 'catalog'
- Click on the three dots button of any product
- Try to edit
-> Traceback: `"product.product"."state" field is undefined.`

**Cause**
The `move_raw_ids` field on the MO form sets a context with `form_view_ref: 'mrp.view_mrp_stock_move_operations'`, so that editing a component's `stock.move` line in place opens that dedicated view: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/20db2910d16fa6ebd07794fb9ed3fb1c8f57b0fc/addons/mrp/views/mrp_production_views.xml#L411-L417 The 'Catalog' button lives inside that same field, and calls `action_add_from_catalog_raw`, which delegates to the mixin's `action_add_from_catalog`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L17 Which conserve the `'form_view_ref'` from context: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L28 and that action requests its form view with `view_id=False`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L25 Which will try to load `view_mrp_stock_move_operations`, since: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_ui_view.py#L3002-L3005 `_get_view` never checks that the resolved view's `model` matches the model it was asked for, so it returns `view_mrp_stock_move_operations`for the `product.product` model: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/mrp/views/stock_move_views.xml#L41 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/stock/views/stock_move_views.xml#L128 `state` doesn't exist on `product.product`, hence the crash.

opw-6433620

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279811

The product specifications table is displayed whenever the product has tags, even if none of them are visible on the ecommerce website.

The product tags template filters out non-visible tags, but the surrounding table remains rendered and appears empty.

Only display the tags table when at least one tag is visible on ecommerce.

@Tecnativa TT63855

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

The condition used to display the product tags table considers all tags associated with the product, including those that are not visible on ecommerce.

**Current behavior before PR:**

When a product only has non-visible tags, the tags table is displayed without any content.

<img width="669" height="350" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4758ea76-5186-4035-a065-aa4c71ce7053" />


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

The tags table is only displayed when the product has at least one tag visible on ecommerce.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282348
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278604

Before this commit:

- Refund orders of scheduled (with shipping date) orders always generated a new picking with negative quantities, even when the original delivery had not been completed.
- This could lead to incorrect stock movements and negative quantity computations for undelivered pickings.

After this commit:

- When processing a refund of a scheduled (with shipping date) order, the behavior now depends on the state of the original picking:
  - If the picking has already been delivered, a return picking is created with the corresponding negative quantities.
  - If the picking has not been delivered, the original picking is updated instead:
    - The picking is cancelled for a full refund.
    - Refunded product moves are removed from the picking for a partial refund.
- This prevents unnecessary negative stock movements and ensures stock operations remain consistent with the delivery status.

Task-5902424

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282087
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271506

Steps to reproduce:
- Make sure you have 2 or more languages installed
- Install events and website app
- For the website, apply the languages you have in settings
- Make sure website default language is different from backend language
- Create an event
- Go to the event's website page through the smart button
- Switch the language of the frontend to one that is different from backend
- Translate (alter) the description for this language
- Click on the outlook icon to download the ics

Current Behavior:
The ics will contain a description based on the backend's chosen language

Expected Behavior:
The ics will contain a description based on the website's chosen language.
If there's no website, it will use the browser's language

Clarification:
The current behavior is confusing for users as they will expect the ics to match
the description of the current webpage which is dependent on the frontend's
selected language. This current behavior also contradicts the google calendar
behavior which grabs the description based on the frontend's selected language.

The endpoints for retrieving the ics file now utilize the website=True flag to
take advantage of IrHttp._match which will automatically set the context
language to be the frontend's rather than the backend language. We want
the ics file to be in the frontend language for visual consistency. Also,
send_email_reminder function does not require with context for this reason

opw-6235320

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280520
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271968

### Current behavior:
When exporting a quotation PDF from the Sales Order a multi-word product name, e.g. "Pick Up", is split into 2 lines

### Expected behavior:
When exporting a quotation PDF from the Sales Order a multi-word product name, e.g. "Pick Up", should stay on a single line when there is enough horizontal space in the Description column

### Steps to reproduce:
1. Sales > new Sales Order
2. Add a product whose name has at least two words, e.g. "Pick Up"
3. Export the Sales Order report to PDF
4. Observe the second word is pushed to a new line, even with free horizontal space

### Cause of the issue:
Commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/6d695e53743a58560a00c163b3ac16ee1f149761 added a `d-flex` in 19.3 to keep product image and name on the same line. The `o_product_name_cell` uses default shrink wrap. Under wkhtmltopdf's old QtWebKit engine the shrink-wrapped width is computed marginally short of the real text width; this margin is font-metric dependent, so with the slightly wider font like Open Sans the last word crosses the boundary and wraps onto a new line, even though the surrounding cell has room.

### Fix:
- Add the Bootstrap `flex-grow-1` utility class to the o_product_name_cell div so it grows to fill the remaining width of the flex row
-  The image keeps its fixed 48px width and stays on the same line
- Small UI change, so no unit test. Only manual test:

Before:
<img width="357" height="211" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/29458867-c7d0-4cc8-8397-4c97b7a2b91d" />

After:
<img width="342" height="196" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9a1ca99c-916f-4179-b9b9-67879885e9d8" />


opw-6434410

**Steps to reproduce**
- Open any MO
- Click on 'catalog'
- Click on the three dots button of any product
- Try to edit
-> Traceback: `"product.product"."state" field is undefined.`

**Cause**
The `move_raw_ids` field on the MO form sets a context with `form_view_ref: 'mrp.view_mrp_stock_move_operations'`, so that editing a component's `stock.move` line in place opens that dedicated view: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/20db2910d16fa6ebd07794fb9ed3fb1c8f57b0fc/addons/mrp/views/mrp_production_views.xml#L411-L417 The 'Catalog' button lives inside that same field, and calls `action_add_from_catalog_raw`, which delegates to the mixin's `action_add_from_catalog`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L17 Which conserve the `'form_view_ref'` from context: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L28 and that action requests its form view with `view_id=False`: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/product/models/product_catalog_mixin.py#L25 Which will try to load `view_mrp_stock_move_operations`, since: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/odoo/addons/base/models/ir_ui_view.py#L3002-L3005 `_get_view` never checks that the resolved view's `model` matches the model it was asked for, so it returns `view_mrp_stock_move_operations`for the `product.product` model: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/mrp/views/stock_move_views.xml#L41 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/3dd41395e2e4205fa477eb474d4a4dba0a976154/addons/stock/views/stock_move_views.xml#L128 `state` doesn't exist on `product.product`, hence the crash.

opw-6433620

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279811

# How to reproduce
- Enable dev mode
- In the website editor, add a Video Inner Content to the page
- Enable atleast one option that is not "Start at"
(e.g. Autoplay)
- Click on the Video, and in the Style tab, click on Replace

# The problem
A traceback is shown

# Cause
When you replace a video, a pop up appears with the different options
associated to that video. These options are rendered with the
`VideoOption` component :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/46d3fee5812b8406aac2244baa76b0daeef358c2/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/media/media_dialog/video_selector.js#L9

The props for that component accept a `value`, which type has been
changed from `Boolean` to `String` in :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/ae894892e048bcdf9c3efcf41b53b44f2fd9e88b

The issue is that some option's value are defined as boolean :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/46d3fee5812b8406aac2244baa76b0daeef358c2/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/media/media_dialog/video_selector.js#L352

So the props validation fail, but only in dev mode :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/46d3fee5812b8406aac2244baa76b0daeef358c2/addons/web/static/lib/owl/owl.js#L3227-L3231

# Proposed solution
When changing the options value in the popup, the trucy values are
replaced by "00:00", which is why the traceback only appears when
replacing the video :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/46d3fee5812b8406aac2244baa76b0daeef358c2/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/media/media_dialog/video_selector.js#L182-L186

We now use the same trucy represetation in `syncOptionsWithUrl()`

opw-6369196

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280375
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276585

Currently an error occurs when user tries to send a pdf of a invoice to a customer.

Steps to replicate: (Make sure to have `python 3.14.4` and `pypdf=5.4.0`)
- Install `l10n_sa_edi` with demo and switch to `My Saudi Arabia Company`.
- Open invoices and create an invoice with customer and an invoice line.
- Click `Send` > Again Click `Send`.

Error:
```
AttributeError: 'PageObject' object has no attribute 'getObject'
AttributeError: No attribute getObject found in IndirectObject or pointed object
```

- A recent [PR] introduced the old `getObject()` API in the PDF/A conversion code, even though it has been renamed to `get_object()` in the modern pypdf API.
- As PyPDF2 1.x compatibility has already been removed, `getObject()` is no longer available and causes the error to log on the terminal.
- Please refer to [1] and [2].

[PR]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/281275

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/248197/files#diff-f3528e61bb9aa2d24d9b57cddafb7429d21216ba29f9dc7e08c92bb617949911L218

[2]: https://pypdf.readthedocs.io/en/stable/meta/changelog-v1.html#details

sentry-7663263079
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Configure a product with a subcontracted BoM and a subcontractor.
2. Create a purchase order of 10 units for that product and confirm it.
3. Receive the 10 units.
4. On the receipt, use "Return for Exchange" on 3 units and validate both the return and the exchange receipt.

Issue
-----
After the exchange, the 3 units stay in the subcontracting location instead of reaching `WH/Stock`, and the received quantity on the purchase order line stays at 7 instead of 10.

`mrp_subcontracting` overrides `_prepare_move_default_values` to force the move `location_dest_id` to the subcontractor location for every `is_subcontract` move:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/mrp_subcontracting/wizard/stock_picking_return.py#L20-L25
That is correct for the return, but the same override also runs for the exchange re-receipt, an `incoming` picking whose destination should be the stock location from `return_type.default_location_dest_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/stock/wizard/stock_picking_return.py#L137-L153

The exchange move then goes from the subcontracting location back to itself, so validating it nets zero and `WH/Stock` never receives the units. Skipping the override when `new_picking.picking_type_id.code` is `incoming` lets the exchange land in stock.

The received quantity must also count that receipt. `_should_count_for_quantity_received` only counts `supplier` or `transit` sources:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L330-L331 so the exchange, sourced from the internal subcontracting location,
is skipped while the return still subtracts its quantity. Counting subcontracting-sourced moves:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/stock_move.py#L312-L314 restores `qty_received` to 10.

opw-6410978

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282373
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279431

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install 'whatsapp', and 'crm_livechat'
- Configure a WhatsApp channel and receive a message to create a conversation in Discuss
- Open the WhatsApp conversation in Discuss
- Click on the 'Create Lead' smart button
- Check the created lead
> The Customer/Contact field is empty

### Cause of Issue:
When a lead is created from a Discuss conversation, `_convert_visitor_to_lead` in `crm_livechat` attempts to set the lead's customer. It does this by checking if the channel has `livechat_customer_partner_ids`. However, in whatsapp discuss conversations, the client is saved in `whatsapp_partner_id` and `livechat_customer_partner_ids` is empty. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/29556fda44b9f1e6cf08129443ca47fa6cda34f9/addons/crm_livechat/models/discuss_channel.py#L54-L64

### Fix:
Kept the fix local to `crm_livechat` and checked whether `whatsapp` is installed before reading `whatsapp_partner_id`, which would otherwise raise an `AttributeError` since `crm_livechat` does not depend on `whatsapp` and vice versa.

opw-6371274

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

The product specifications table is displayed whenever the product has tags, even if none of them are visible on the ecommerce website.

The product tags template filters out non-visible tags, but the surrounding table remains rendered and appears empty.

Only display the tags table when at least one tag is visible on ecommerce.

@Tecnativa TT63855

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

The condition used to display the product tags table considers all tags associated with the product, including those that are not visible on ecommerce.

**Current behavior before PR:**

When a product only has non-visible tags, the tags table is displayed without any content.

<img width="669" height="350" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4758ea76-5186-4035-a065-aa4c71ce7053" />


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

The tags table is only displayed when the product has at least one tag visible on ecommerce.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282348
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278604

Behavior before:
When uploading an animated GIF to fields utilizing image responsive sizing or cropping (such as employee avatars or product images), no downscaling or cropping occurs for sub-variants like 'image_128' or 'image_1024'. The responsive fields replicate the exact file size and data footprint of the original large image, leading to heavy storage overhead and unnecessary frontend asset loading.

Behavior after:
Animated GIF images scale down and crop correctly to match requested responsive dimensions and aspect ratios. Sub-variants take up significantly less space in the filestore, matching proportional dimensions without dropping or stripping the underlying animation loop. Large images that are smaller than requested boxes are safely left un-upscaled to maximize database deduplication.

Root Cause:
Historically, a legacy safeguard bypassed GIF resizing and cropping because older versions of the Pillow library did not gracefully handle multi-frame sequential image buffers. As a result, standard 'image.crop()', 'image.thumbnail()', or 'image.resize()' implementations would flatten multi-frame animated sequences down into a single, static first frame or throw dimension/mode mismatches during save operations.

Fix:
Intercept the image processing pipeline when encountering an asset identified as a GIF where 'is_animated' evaluates to True. Implemented a unified, in-place multi-frame helper routine (`_apply_gif_operation`) using PIL's 'ImageSequence.Iterator' to cleanly step through, normalize to a uniform color mode (RGBA), duplicate, and modify each animation frame individually. 

This single helper handles sequential workflows for both 'crop' and 'thumbnail' operations while preserving individual frame duration arrays and native loop metadata. Both 'resize' and 'crop_resize' leverage this logic to achieve precise dimensions cleanly.

Crucially, upscaling (expanding) is intentionally unsupported for animated GIFs. Forcing a low-resolution, 256-color indexed animation to stretch beyond its native dimensions forces heavy color dithering across every single frame. This breaks the sequential LZW pattern compression, causing the resulting file sizes to skyrocket catastrophically. The logic utilizes thumbnail boundaries to completely block this expansion, protecting the filestore from accidental bloat.

Benchmark:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| GIF size    | Variant          | Size Before (KB)   | Size After (KB)   |
|---------------|--------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (2.5MB)    | image_1024  | 2475.87                 | 2475.87             |
|                   | image_128    | 2475.87                 |  257.93              |
|---------------|--------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------| 
| (3.8MB)     | image_1024 | 3724.93                 | 3724.93             |
|                    | image_128   | 3724.93                 |  463.62              |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (442KB)     | image_1024 |  432.49                  |  432.49              |
|                    | image_128   |  432.49                  |   36.14               |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (3.6MB)     | image_1024 | 3491.98                 | 3491.98             |
|                    | image_128   | 3491.98                 | 1728.25             |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|

opw-6232841

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#281883
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273098

Currently, when the user scraps a component during a manufacturing order, the system can still consume the same lot/serial number during production, leading to double consumption even when the product is no longer available in inventory.

## Steps to produce:
- Install the Manufacturing app.
- Enable 'Work Orders' and 'Lots & Serial Numbers' from the settings.
- Create two products: 'Car' and 'Engine'.
- Configure 'Engine' to be tracked by 'Serial Number' and update its on-hand quantity to 2 using two different serial numbers.
- Create a Bill of Materials (BoM) for 'Car' with 'Engine' as a component.
- Create a work center named 'Car Assembly'.
- Go to Manufacturing > Configuration > Operations.
- Create a new manufacturing operation named 'Engine Insertion' with:
  - Bill of Materials: 'Car'
  - Work Center: 'Car Assembly'
- Create and confirm a new Manufacturing Order (MO) for 'Car'.
- Open the related work order and start the operation.
- From Actions > Scrap, scrap the 'Engine' serial number currently reserved for the MO.
- Click Produce All.
- Open the product view for 'Engine' and check the on-hand quantity.

## Observed behavior:
Even after the user scraps the product during the work order, the system still allows the same serial-numbered component to be consumed during production. This results in negative on-hand quantities and creates inconsistencies in inventory and manufacturing data.

## Root cause:
When the user starts the work order, the `button_start` function [1] is called. This sets the `qty_producing` field, which triggers its inverse method `_set_qty_producing`. As part of this flow, the component move is marked as picked at [2]. This, in turn, triggers the inverse method of the `picked` field, which marks all move lines in the move as picked, as shown at [3].

Later, when the user scraps the same serial-numbered product, the `do_scrap` function is called. This invokes `_action_done` at [4], which further calls `_action_done` on the move lines at [5]. During this process, `_free_reservation` is executed at [6].

However, because the move lines were previously marked as picked, they no longer satisfy the domain condition at [7]. As a result, they are not unlinked at [8]. This leaves the reservation intact and eventually causes the scrapped component to still be consumed when the user produces the quantity on the manufacturing order.

**Why does this issue not occur in saas-19.3?**
This issue no longer occurs in saas-19.3 after this [commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/bb56600bfc81b9a6573a867df93a706de8154d0a), which removed the manual consumption field. As a consequence, move lines are no longer marked as picked when starting work orders, preventing the inconsistent state that leads to this issue.
[1]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/mrp/models/mrp_workorder.py#L659-L660 [2]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1417-L1421 [3]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L287-L290 [4]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_scrap.py#L152-L158 [5]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L2125 [6]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L696-L700 [7]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L807-L817 [8]:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8f5d7b5cd0c3e1808375baef8f0834d3f2e27a75/addons/stock/models/stock_move_line.py#L851
## Solution:
When a component move line is scrapped, it should be unpicked so that the system can reserve the next available lot/serial number automatically.

Once a component has been physically scrapped, it no longer makes sense to keep it marked as picked and reserved. Doing so leaves the MO in an inconsistent state, where the system still considers the scrapped component usable. By unpicking the move line after scrapping, both the system and the user clearly see that there is no longer any reserved quantity associated with that component.

This also allows system to automatically pick from next available lot or serial number, ensuring the manufacturing process can continue smoothly.

Such behavior is especially important in shop floor scenarios, where mistakes or damages may occur after components have already been registered, and the manufacturing process should continue without interruption.


opw-6157406

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#264589

Behavior before:
When uploading an animated GIF to fields utilizing image responsive sizing or cropping (such as employee avatars or product images), no downscaling or cropping occurs for sub-variants like 'image_128' or 'image_1024'. The responsive fields replicate the exact file size and data footprint of the original large image, leading to heavy storage overhead and unnecessary frontend asset loading.

Behavior after:
Animated GIF images scale down and crop correctly to match requested responsive dimensions and aspect ratios. Sub-variants take up significantly less space in the filestore, matching proportional dimensions without dropping or stripping the underlying animation loop. Large images that are smaller than requested boxes are safely left un-upscaled to maximize database deduplication.

Root Cause:
Historically, a legacy safeguard bypassed GIF resizing and cropping because older versions of the Pillow library did not gracefully handle multi-frame sequential image buffers. As a result, standard 'image.crop()', 'image.thumbnail()', or 'image.resize()' implementations would flatten multi-frame animated sequences down into a single, static first frame or throw dimension/mode mismatches during save operations.

Fix:
Intercept the image processing pipeline when encountering an asset identified as a GIF where 'is_animated' evaluates to True. Implemented a unified, in-place multi-frame helper routine (`_apply_gif_operation`) using PIL's 'ImageSequence.Iterator' to cleanly step through, normalize to a uniform color mode (RGBA), duplicate, and modify each animation frame individually. 

This single helper handles sequential workflows for both 'crop' and 'thumbnail' operations while preserving individual frame duration arrays and native loop metadata. Both 'resize' and 'crop_resize' leverage this logic to achieve precise dimensions cleanly.

Crucially, upscaling (expanding) is intentionally unsupported for animated GIFs. Forcing a low-resolution, 256-color indexed animation to stretch beyond its native dimensions forces heavy color dithering across every single frame. This breaks the sequential LZW pattern compression, causing the resulting file sizes to skyrocket catastrophically. The logic utilizes thumbnail boundaries to completely block this expansion, protecting the filestore from accidental bloat.

Benchmark:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| GIF size    | Variant          | Size Before (KB)   | Size After (KB)   |
|---------------|--------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (2.5MB)    | image_1024  | 2475.87                 | 2475.87             |
|                   | image_128    | 2475.87                 |  257.93              |
|---------------|--------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------| 
| (3.8MB)     | image_1024 | 3724.93                 | 3724.93             |
|                    | image_128   | 3724.93                 |  463.62              |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (442KB)     | image_1024 |  432.49                  |  432.49              |
|                    | image_128   |  432.49                  |   36.14               |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|
| (3.6MB)     | image_1024 | 3491.98                 | 3491.98             |
|                    | image_128   | 3491.98                 | 1728.25             |
|----------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|

opw-6232841
[odoo/enterprise#128032](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/128032)

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#273098

The product specifications table is displayed whenever the product has tags, even if none of them are visible on the ecommerce website.

The product tags template filters out non-visible tags, but the surrounding table remains rendered and appears empty.

Only display the tags table when at least one tag is visible on ecommerce.

@Tecnativa TT63855

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

The condition used to display the product tags table considers all tags associated with the product, including those that are not visible on ecommerce.

**Current behavior before PR:**

When a product only has non-visible tags, the tags table is displayed without any content.

<img width="669" height="350" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4758ea76-5186-4035-a065-aa4c71ce7053" />


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

The tags table is only displayed when the product has at least one tag visible on ecommerce.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282348
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278604

Steps to reproduce:
---
- Install `website_sale` module.
- Enable `Product Variants` and `Prevent Sale of Zero Priced Product` in settings.
- Create new attribute > set `Variant Creation` as `Never` and also add value with extra price.
- Create a product with sales price = 0, assign the attribute, and publish it.
- As a public user (incognito), try to add the product to the cart.

Issue:
---
- In terminal error `The given product does not exist therefore it cannot be added to cart` is raised.

Root cause:
---
- In `_is_add_to_cart_allowed()`[1], the method calls `_get_contextual_price()` [2] to check if the product's price is zero when `prevent_zero_price_sale` is enabled.
- However, `_get_contextual_price()` is called without the no-variant attribute values in the context, so it does not account for their `price_extra`. For a product with list price as 0 and attribute with extra price, the price is incorrectly computed as 0, causing `_is_add_to_cart_allowed()` to return `False`.

Solution:
---
- Before calling `_is_add_to_cart_allowed()`, set the product's context with the no-variant attribute values via `_get_product_price_context()`, so that `_get_contextual_price()` correctly includes the price extra in its computation.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bbafbbd8950ec7123ab652851ede5479484eee26/addons/website_sale/controllers/cart.py#L117-L120

[2]https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/bbafbbd8950ec7123ab652851ede5479484eee26/addons/website_sale/models/product_product.py#L149-L150

opw-6365566
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278620

### Issue:
In 19.3, the following hoot tests fail with a RunBot error:
- "called at right time (when canceling order)"
- "called at right time (when canceling order never sent to blackbox)"
- "called at right time (when canceling a combo order)"

### Cause:
Commit 0dfd71b9f4 removed `close` from `ControlButtonsPopup` as the Dialog patch now handles closing via `this.data.close()` With no remaining props to declare, `static props` was removed entirely

Without `static props`, Owl skips all prop validation but emits: "Component 'ControlButtonsPopup' does not have a
static props description"
`mountWithCleanup` forces `warnIfNoStaticProps` to `true` in hoot tests, causing the tests to fail

`close` is declared as optional since `dialog_service.js` always injects it via `subProps: markRaw({ ...props, close })` at runtime, but the component no longer uses it directly

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_be_pos_blackbox`
- Enable Developer mode
- Open the JS test UI
- Run one of the failing tests

runbot-941231

Steps to reproduce:
- Install Point of Sale without the Restaurant module
- Open a session and scan the barcode of a product

Issue:
The product is never added to the order, the client crashes with "TypeError: this.pos.autoCourseAllocation is not a function".

Cause:
b86126bbfb17105323a8ac972cb5062b95325fc4 moved autoCourseAllocation and cleanAutoCourseAllocation out of ProductScreen (point_of_sale) into the PosStore patch of pos_restaurant, but kept the two call sites in point_of_sale's ProductScreen._barcodeProductAction, now routed through this.pos. Both methods therefore only exist when pos_restaurant is installed, so on a plain shop configuration the call throws. The other call site, ProductScreen.addProductToOrder, is patched in pos_restaurant itself, which is why only the barcode path is affected. Runbot installs every module, so the patch is always loaded there and the crash went unnoticed.

Also restore the argument forwarding in the pos_restaurant PosOrder.removeOrderline patch introduced by the same commit: it declares deep but called super.removeOrderline(line), dropping it. PosStore.breakCombo is the only caller passing deep=false.

opw-6478112

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

Steps to reproduce
------------------
1. Configure a product with a subcontracted BoM and a subcontractor.
2. Create a purchase order of 10 units for that product and confirm it.
3. Receive the 10 units.
4. On the receipt, use "Return for Exchange" on 3 units and validate both the return and the exchange receipt.

Issue
-----
After the exchange, the 3 units stay in the subcontracting location instead of reaching `WH/Stock`, and the received quantity on the purchase order line stays at 7 instead of 10.

`mrp_subcontracting` overrides `_prepare_move_default_values` to force the move `location_dest_id` to the subcontractor location for every `is_subcontract` move:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/mrp_subcontracting/wizard/stock_picking_return.py#L20-L25
That is correct for the return, but the same override also runs for the exchange re-receipt, an `incoming` picking whose destination should be the stock location from `return_type.default_location_dest_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/stock/wizard/stock_picking_return.py#L137-L153

The exchange move then goes from the subcontracting location back to itself, so validating it nets zero and `WH/Stock` never receives the units. Skipping the override when `new_picking.picking_type_id.code` is `incoming` lets the exchange land in stock.

The received quantity must also count that receipt. `_should_count_for_quantity_received` only counts `supplier` or `transit` sources:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L330-L331 so the exchange, sourced from the internal subcontracting location,
is skipped while the return still subtracts its quantity. Counting subcontracting-sourced moves:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/d9c06a66356dd9d5a50821b8cde6194967353c18/addons/mrp_subcontracting/models/stock_move.py#L312-L314 restores `qty_received` to 10.

opw-6410978

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282373
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279431

The JsonFormatter has two bugs

- the ignore list is not working as expected
- in 18.0-18.4 the 'test' key is broken

This commit add tests to ensure those behavior works as expected

While on it, also adds a `additional_record_keys` parameter to allow to specifically add keys to the default list, without having to override the whole list, and add additional default keys (exc_info and test)

The previous `ignored_record_keys` default value was possible to remove by calling `JSONFormatter(ignore_record_keys=[])`

The purpose was to be able to easily include all keys and ignore the default ingnore list, but this makes the additional blacklisting of a few keys more tedious, and the general usage and implementation more complex

`JSONFormatter(ignore_record_keys=[*JSONFormatter.DEFAULT_IGNORED_RECORD_KEYS, 'other key'])`

To simplify the logic, **this is not the case anymore**, so to include all keys something like this would be needed

`JSONFormatter(additional_record_keys=JSONFormatter.DEFAULT_IGNORED_RECORD_KEYS)`

Or an hardcoded list.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279828
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279049

### Issue before this commit:
When generating an electronic invoice (e.g., ZUGFeRD/Factur-X) with a 0% tax from a non-EEA supplier (e.g., Switzerland) to an EEA customer (e.g., Germany), the XML tax <ram:CategoryCode> is incorrectly set to 'E' (Exempt) instead of 'G' (Export).

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_ch
2. Set the VAT for the CH company
3. Create an invoice for a German customer with 0% tax setted (for which you have to set as electronic invoicing the ZUGFeRD template into the Accounting tab of his contact)
4. Send it and see that the tag <ram:CategoryCode> is setted as E instead of G

### Cause of the issue:
The logic assigning the 'G' and 'K' tax category codes was only triggered if the supplier was located within the EEA. If the supplier was outside the EEA, the code bypassed this block entirely and fell back to the default 'E' code for 0% taxes.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
Update the condition to trigger when either the supplier or the customer is in the EEA. This ensures that cross-border transactions involving at least one EEA party correctly evaluate and apply the 'G' (Export outside the EU) category code.  Also the case supplier not in eea with VAT filled in + customer in eea + RC tax with amount != 0 is fixed now (letter G reported instead of S).

### Documentation:
[eInvoicing technical guidance document_v1.pdf](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/30831749/eInvoicing.technical.guidance.document_v1.pdf)


opw-6407399

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282497
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281245

The product specifications table is displayed whenever the product has tags, even if none of them are visible on the ecommerce website.

The product tags template filters out non-visible tags, but the surrounding table remains rendered and appears empty.

Only display the tags table when at least one tag is visible on ecommerce.

@Tecnativa TT63855

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

The condition used to display the product tags table considers all tags associated with the product, including those that are not visible on ecommerce.

**Current behavior before PR:**

When a product only has non-visible tags, the tags table is displayed without any content.

<img width="669" height="350" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4758ea76-5186-4035-a065-aa4c71ce7053" />


**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

The tags table is only displayed when the product has at least one tag visible on ecommerce.




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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282348
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278604

**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#277232

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

Commit: 68343a56ef0e727c8ac0be4875bedd0fb7460d04 added the possibility of having a negative value for taxable amount in zatca xml to fix this warning:

[202] BR-O-08 : [BR-O-08]-In a VAT
breakdown (BG-23) where the VAT category code (BT-118) is ' Not subject to VAT' the VAT category taxable amount (BT-116) shall equal the sum of Invoice line net amounts (BT-131) minus the sum of Document level allowance amounts (BT-92) plus the sum of Document level charge amounts (BT-99) where the VAT category codes (BT-151, BT-95, BT-102) are 'Not subject to VAT'.

However you cannot have a negative value for this node as stipulated by:

BR-KSA-F-04 All the document amounts and quantities must be positive.
ubl:Invoice / ubl:Invoice / cac:AllowanceCharge / cbc:Amount / ubl:Invoice / cac:AllowanceCharge / cbc:BaseAmount / ubl:Invoice / cac:TaxTotal / cbc:TaxAmount
/ ubl:Invoice / cac:TaxTotal / cac:TaxSubtotal /
cbc:TaxableAmount

(source: https://zatca.gov.sa/ar/E-Invoicing/SystemsDevelopers/Documents/20220624_ZATCA_Electronic_Invoice_XML_Implementation_Standard_vF.pdf)

The reverted commit causes an error when sending an invoice with a 0% or a sale order with a down payment:
- Create a sale order with a 0%.
- Create a downpayment and process it by zatca
- Process the delivery on the SO and create the final invoice.
- The invoice will be rejected by zata with the error:

BR-KSA-80 If Pre-Paid amount (BT-113) is
provided then the Pre-Paid
amount (BT-113) must equal to
the sum total of the Prepayment
VAT category Taxable Amount
(KSA-31) and Prepayment VAT
Category Tax Amount (KSA-32)

opw-5072577

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#279945

Steps to reproduce
---
1. Enable Storage Locations and Lots & Serial Numbers.
2. Add a putaway rule sending a lot-tracked product from WH/Stock to WH/Stock/Shelf 1.
3. Confirm a receipt reserving 2 units of that product; putaway sets the reserved move line destination to WH/Stock/Shelf 1.
4. In the Barcode app, scan a first lot, then a second lot.

The second lot lands on a separate line at WH/Stock instead of WH/Stock/Shelf 1.

Issue
---
The first lot reuses the reserved line and keeps its Shelf 1 destination. The second lot cannot reuse it because its tracking number differs, so `_findLine` returns nothing and `_getNewLineDefaultValues` builds a new line with `location_dest_id` set to `_defaultDestLocation()`, the picking's default destination (WH/Stock).

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/314a79b774f30dc9377b2971492576c4b84483e1/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L1591-L1601

Putaway relocates the destination on the move line at reservation, never on the picking, so only the reserved line carries Shelf 1. Since `groupKey` includes `location_dest_id`, the new line does not group with the first lot and shows separately at WH/Stock. This is not a regression: new lines have always defaulted to the operation destination.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/314a79b774f30dc9377b2971492576c4b84483e1/stock_barcode/static/src/models/barcode_picking_model.js#L239-L241

The new line now inherits the selected line's `location_dest_id`, already relocated by putaway, instead of the default.

opw-6317077

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127906
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125309

## [FIX] timesheet_grid: remove duplicate rpc call

Before this commit, the `loadTimesheets` method is called 2 times in a
row, that method does a rpc call to load the existing timesheets and so,
it is not needed to call it 2 times since the rpc will return the exact
same result.

This commit removes the rpc call when we compute the suggestions to only
load the timesheets when we load all the data.

## [FIX] timesheet_grid: show chronological view instead of project view

Before this commit, the `by project` view were loaded first in the
timesheet assistant action, to group the suggestion by project, the
problem is at the beginning the view will not really show a perfect
matching and so the user could think the feature does not work and he
will not understand how to correctly match the suggestions shown in the
view.

This commit changes the view loaded by default in Timesheets Assistant
to first show the chronological view, that view is more logical for the
current user to rethink what he did in the past to correctly map the
events to a project and a task when he generates his timesheets thanks
to those events. The by project view is still useful afterwards when the
system has learned the choices made by the current user.

## [FIX] timesheet_grid: ensure events are consumed forever

Before this commit, the suggestions removed by the current user comes
back when he changes the date and come back to the day he removes the
suggestions. The reason is because a shallow copy of events consumed is
made and that copy alters the duration of the initial object.

This commit avoids copying the consumed events object to make sure the
initial object is not altered when processing the events to remove them
if they are removed before by the user.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:

1. install timesheet_grid and Activity watch, makes sure Activity watch
collects some activities on your computer.
2. Go to Assistant menu in timesheets app.
3. Remove some suggestions displayed in the right panel.
4. Go to next date.
5. Come back to previous date.

### Expected Behavior:


The suggestions removed should not appear again.

### Actual Behavior:

The suggestions removed come back in the view.

## [FIX] timesheet_grid: fix flicker when suggestion selected

Before this commit, when the user selects a suggestion in timesheet
assistant, there is a small flicker appears because the height of the
row grows because of the border added to highlight the suggestion
selected.

This commit reviews a bit the style to make sure the border bottom in
the previous element is removed if the element is not selected or if the
2 consecutives suggestions are selected.

## [FIX] timesheet_grid: fix discord rules to handle discord in web

Before this commit, when the user uses discord in its browser instead of
the app on his computer, the discord rules don't catch the activity
watch events because the tab title is different than the windows name in
the app.

This commit adapts the regex of Discord rules to handle the both use
cases.

task-[6385639](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6385639)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126435
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124855

Enterprise half of odoo/odoo#282760 — same mechanical change, same reasoning.

7 call-sites called the owl2-compat `useLayoutEffect` **with no dependency array**, which makes it an alias for "run on mount, re-run on every patch". They are translated to `onMounted` + `onPatched`.

| site | effect |
| --- | --- |
| `account_reports/account_return_check_kanban_controller.js` | restore the renderer scroll position |
| `data_cleaning/data_cleaning_list_view.js` | toggle control-panel buttons from the selection |
| `data_cleaning/data_merge_list_view.js` | idem |
| `marketing_automation/marketing_automation_one2many.js` | `applyTabPanelVisibility()` |
| `planning/planning_gantt_renderer.js` | add `o_planning_gantt` on the grid |
| `web_enterprise/navbar.js` | `_updateMenuAppsIcon()` |
| `web_map/map_renderer.js` | `updateMap()` + deferred marker popover |

### Why this is behaviour-preserving

Called without a dependency array, the compat `useLayoutEffect` defaults `computeDependencies` to `() => [NaN]`. `NaN !== NaN`, so the diff in its `onPatched` always succeeds and the effect already re-ran on **every** patch. `onMounted` + `onPatched` is therefore an exact translation.

Two incidental parts of the shim fall away, both no-ops here: `onWillRender(() => computeDependencies())` reads nothing when there is no dependency array, and `onWillUnmount(() => cleanup && cleanup())` never fires because none of these 7 effects return a cleanup function.

Note this argument is specific to the no-dependency-array sites and does *not* generalise to `useLayoutEffect` calls that pass real dependencies.

### One judgement call

`account_return_check_kanban_controller` keeps `onPatched`. Its `rendererScrollPositions = null` latch reads like a run-once guard, but it sits inside `if (renderer)`: when the scroll container is not in the DOM yet at mount, the latch stays set and a later patch retries the restore. Keeping both hooks preserves that.

### Conflicts with

`web_map/map_renderer.js` is also touched by odoo/enterprise#127921, which converts the *empty*-dependency-array site (`() => []`) in the same `setup()` and deliberately leaves this one alone. The two changes are disjoint but adjacent, so whichever lands second needs a trivial rebase — and once both are in, `useLayoutEffect` is no longer used in that file and its import should go.

### Not in this PR

- The no-dependency-array sites whose effect **does** return a cleanup function need the full `onMounted`/`onPatched`/`onWillUnmount` triple and are handled separately (`sale_commission` by the `useChart` hook in odoo/enterprise#128100).
- `spreadsheet_edition` is owned by another team and is left alone.
- `web_gantt/static/tests/gantt_view_other.test.js` has one more, kept out of a production-code PR.

### Testing

Static only: every remaining `useLayoutEffect` call in the tree was re-parsed with balanced-paren argument splitting to confirm no no-dependency-array site is left outside the exclusions above, and every touched file was checked for a missing or newly-unused `useLayoutEffect`/`onMounted`/`onPatched` import. No behaviour change is intended, so no test was added or updated.

Part of the `useLayoutEffect` -> OWL3 migration.

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

### Steps to reproduce

1. Go to `Accounting > Customers > Invoices` and create an invoice on a given journal, leaving it in draft. For the clearest case, leave it with no invoice line.
2. Go to `Accounting > Configuration > Journals`, open that journal and archive it.
3. `_check_auto_post_draft_entries` raises: *"You can not archive a journal containing draft journal entries. To proceed: 1/ click on the top-right button 'Journal Entries' from this journal form 2/ then filter on 'Draft' entries 3/ select them all and post or delete them through the action menu"*.
4. Follow those steps: click the `Journal Entries` smart button on the journal form.

### Current behaviour

The list comes up empty, so the user concludes the error message is wrong, while the draft entries do exist.

The instructions cannot be followed:

- The smart button opens `action_account_moves_all_a`, which is named **"Journal Items"** and targets **`account.move.line`**, not `account.move`. The label of the button and the name of the action it opens do not match.
- That action defaults to `search_default_posted: 1`, so no draft record is listed.
- Draft entries with **no line at all** — commonly created through the incoming mail alias of a journal — have no `account.move.line`, so they stay invisible in that view even after switching the filter.
- The action menu of a move line list offers no way to post or delete the entries, and the action sets `create: 0`.
- The filter is labelled **"Unposted"**, not "Draft".

The offending entries are only reachable through `Accounting > Accounting > Journal Entries`, filtering by journal and by "Unposted".

### Expected behaviour

The error should point to a view where the records blocking the archiving are actually listed and actionable.

### This PR

Message only — the validation itself is unchanged. It now points to `Accounting > Accounting > Journal Entries` and uses the real filter name, "Unposted".

Not addressed here, since it is a UI change rather than a message fix: the root cause is the `Journal Entries` label on a button that opens the `Journal Items` action (`account_journal_views.xml`). Renaming the button to match its action would make the mismatch go away at the source. Happy to add it here if you prefer.

Targeted at 18.0 because that is where the misleading message is being hit in practice; it is identical on 19.0 and master. If a translatable string change does not qualify for the stable series, tell me and I will retarget to master.

> Reopening of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/282286, which GitHub closed automatically after a bad force-push on my side (the branch was pushed from a shallow clone and lost its parent commit). The branch history is fixed and the PR could not be reopened, hence this one. The review discussion is in the previous PR.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Go to `Accounting > Customers > Invoices` and create an invoice on a given journal, leaving it in draft. For the clearest case, leave it with no invoice line.
2. Go to `Accounting > Configuration > Journals`, open that journal and archive it.
3. `_check_auto_post_draft_entries` raises: *"You can not archive a journal containing draft journal entries. To proceed: 1/ click on the top-right button 'Journal Entries' from this journal form 2/ then filter on 'Draft' entries 3/ select them all and post or delete them through the action menu"*.
4. Follow those steps: click the `Journal Entries` smart button on the journal form.

### Current behaviour

The list comes up empty, so the user concludes the error message is wrong, while the draft entries do exist.

The instructions cannot be followed:

- The smart button opens `action_account_moves_all_a`, which is named **"Journal Items"** and targets **`account.move.line`**, not `account.move`. The label of the button and the name of the action it opens do not match.
- That action defaults to `search_default_posted: 1`, so no draft record is listed.
- Draft entries with **no line at all** — commonly created through the incoming mail alias of a journal — have no `account.move.line`, so they stay invisible in that view even after switching the filter.
- The action menu of a move line list offers no way to post or delete the entries, and the action sets `create: 0`.
- The filter is labelled **"Unposted"**, not "Draft".

The offending entries are only reachable through `Accounting > Accounting > Journal Entries`, filtering by journal and by "Unposted".

### Expected behaviour

The error should point to a view where the records blocking the archiving are actually listed and actionable.

### This PR

Two changes, the validation itself is unchanged:

- The error message now points to `Accounting > Accounting > Journal Entries` and uses the real filter name, "Unposted".
- The smart button of the journal form is renamed to **"Journal Items"**, so its label matches the action it opens and no longer suggests it lists journal entries. This was asked for in the review of the previous PR.

Targeted at 18.0 because that is where the misleading message is being hit in practice; it is identical on 19.0 and master. If a translatable string change does not qualify for the stable series, tell me and I will retarget to master.

* = 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

### Issue:
When multiple partners share the same email address, `_mail_find_partner_from_emails` may resolve to the wrong partner when the input is a formatted email like "`Name <email>`"

This affects use cases like email templates using `{{object.company_id.email_formatted}}` as sender, where the wrong company partner could be selected

### Cause:
The lookup in `done_partners` only matched on `email_normalized`, which cannot distinguish partners sharing the same email but with different names

The `email_formatted` field carries both name and email, allowing an exact match when the input is a formatted email

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `account`
- Create an Email Template (Applies to: account.move, From: {{object.company_id.email_formatted}})
- Create a second company B with the same email as the default (e.g. info@yourcompany.com)
- In Settings (logged in as company B), set a Fiscal Position (e.g. US Taxable)
- Create an Invoice on company B
- In the chatter, click Send message, click the expand arrows button, use the three dots menu to select the template
- Send and check the Sender in the chatter

Before the fix, the sender resolves to the default company even though the invoice belongs to company B

opw-6260992

Steps to produce:
---
- Install the `Sales` module.
- In Settings, enable `Automatic Invoice`.
- Also enable the Demo payment provider.
- Create a sale order with a total of `800` and confirm it.
- Generate a payment link for `200` from the gear icon and pay it.
- Generate a second payment link for `300` and pay it.
- Generate a final payment link for the remaining `300` and pay it.

Issue:
---
- After the first payment (200), an `invoice of 200` is created. Correct.
- After the second payment (300), an` invoice of 500` is created instead of 300.
- After the third payment (300), an `invoice of 100` is created instead of 300.

Root cause:
---
- The down payment invoice uses `order.amount_paid`, the cumulative sum of all transactions on the order, instead of the amount of the latest payment. This causes invoices to be sized off the running total instead of the individual payment delta.

Fix:
---
- Compute the invoice amount as `order.amount_paid - order.amount_invoiced` (the unpaid) instead of passing the cumulative `amount_paid` directly.

opw-6324036
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Log in as a user with only the "Inventory / User" access right and
Products/Create (product.group_product_manager) granted (write access
to product.product/product.template)

- Open a storable product's form view.
    - Observe the "Quantity On Hand" field is readonly, and the "On Hand"
    quants popup opened from it is read-only too.
- Go to the Inventory > Physical Inventory / Inventory Adjustments menu instead.
    - Observe the same user can freely edit the quantity and apply the inventory adjustment.

Problem:
A stock user could apply inventory adjustments from the Inventory
Adjustments menu, but could not perform the exact same action from
the product form, forcing an unnecessary detour.

Three places in `stock` still gated editing to `stock.group_stock_manager`,
even though `inventory_mode` is already granted to any `stock.group_stock_user`
by `stock.quant._set_view_context()`, and the underlying write is already
guarded correctly by `_is_inventory_mode()`:
- `stock.quant._get_quants_action()` only picks the editable tree view
(used by the "On Hand" quants popup) for managers:
  https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/19.0/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L1328
- The product form's own "Quantity On Hand" field/link
(`product_views.xml`) is only made editable for managers, and forced
readonly for everyone else:
  https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/19.0/addons/stock/views/product_views.xml#L192-L196
- The `inventory_quantity_auto_apply` field itself (the one actually
rendered in the editable quants list, whether opened from the product
form or the Forecasted Report) is restricted to managers at the Python
field-definition level:
  https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/19.0/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L100-L104

All three checks were left over from before commit
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/37d96f49ccc85fa651f092b6c32bab1af2c34f2d,
which gave `stock.group_stock_user` write access on `stock.quant`
(see `ir.model.access.csv`) and dropped the manager-only restriction on
`action_apply_inventory`. The ACL and the Inventory Adjustments flow
were updated at the time, but these three entry points were not, leaving
them stricter than the rest of the permission model.

opw-6439844

Commit: 68343a56ef0e727c8ac0be4875bedd0fb7460d04 added the possibility of having a negative value for taxable amount in zatca xml to fix this warning:

[202] BR-O-08 : [BR-O-08]-In a VAT
breakdown (BG-23) where the VAT category code (BT-118) is ' Not subject to VAT' the VAT category taxable amount (BT-116) shall equal the sum of Invoice line net amounts (BT-131) minus the sum of Document level allowance amounts (BT-92) plus the sum of Document level charge amounts (BT-99) where the VAT category codes (BT-151, BT-95, BT-102) are 'Not subject to VAT'.

However you cannot have a negative value for this node as stipulated by:

BR-KSA-F-04 All the document amounts and quantities must be positive.
ubl:Invoice / ubl:Invoice / cac:AllowanceCharge / cbc:Amount / ubl:Invoice / cac:AllowanceCharge / cbc:BaseAmount / ubl:Invoice / cac:TaxTotal / cbc:TaxAmount
/ ubl:Invoice / cac:TaxTotal / cac:TaxSubtotal /
cbc:TaxableAmount

(source: https://zatca.gov.sa/ar/E-Invoicing/SystemsDevelopers/Documents/20220624_ZATCA_Electronic_Invoice_XML_Implementation_Standard_vF.pdf)

The reverted commit causes an error when sending an invoice with a 0% or a sale order with a down payment:
- Create a sale order with a 0%.
- Create a downpayment and process it by zatca
- Process the delivery on the SO and create the final invoice.
- The invoice will be rejected by zata with the error:

BR-KSA-80 If Pre-Paid amount (BT-113) is
provided then the Pre-Paid
amount (BT-113) must equal to
the sum total of the Prepayment
VAT category Taxable Amount
(KSA-31) and Prepayment VAT
Category Tax Amount (KSA-32)

opw-5072577

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#279945

## Steps to reproduce:

- Enable ship later for the PoS
- Create a product A, tracked by lots
- Create a kit product, include a component A
- Go to the PoS, order this kit product
- Also order the component A
- Tick the ship later option --> A traceback appears

## Why the fix:

With the ship later option activated, we do not compute the lines_data in the same way we do when asking for an invoice.

For the invoice, https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7676723dbb47c09a71925831b13ced97eb855297/addons/point_of_sale/models/stock_picking.py#L37 
We take every stockable line that is positive, but with the ship later option, we only take the lines that are tracked, meaning in this exemple we do not take the Kit line in lines_data. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7676723dbb47c09a71925831b13ced97eb855297/addons/point_of_sale/models/pos_order.py#L1525-L1532

The result of this is that we do not get the kit line in **_get_lot_line_qty**, explaining the traceback, as we are trying to access it.

Instead of relying on **lines_data** that could change depending on the context, we now use the pos order to fetch the line(s) with our kit product.

Adding the kit line to **lines_data** will most likely result in unwanted changes because lots of operations are done on each of it's items.

opw-6431457

When the FIFO vacuum creates the "Expenses Revaluation" journal entry for an anglo-saxon delivery whose cost is adjusted by a later receipt, the JE was built using `env.company` instead of the company of the vacuumed SVL.

Steps to reproduce:
- Enable multi-company and activate anglo-saxon accounting on two companies A and B.
- In company B, on the product category: set FIFO costing + Automated  valuation, and set the stock input / stock output / stock valuation accounts and the stock journal. The Stock Output account must have "Allow Reconciliation" enabled.
- In company B, on the product: set an Expense Account and set the Cost (e.g. 10.0) this is the price the delivery will be valued at while the stock is negative. The product must have no quantity on hand in company B.
- While working in company B, sell and deliver 1 unit of that product: the delivery is valued at 10.0 and creates a  negative valuation layer.
- Still in company B, create and post the customer invoice of that sale, so the Stock Output line of the delivery entry gets reconciled with the Stock Output line of the anglo-saxon COGS entry of the invoice.
- Switch the active company to A, and from there create a purchase order of that product for company B at a different price (e.g. 15.0), then validate the linked receipt into company B's warehouse.
- The vacuum compensates the negative layer, but the resulting "Expenses Revaluation of ..." journal entry is posted in company A instead of company B.

This fix forces the company context to `vacuum_svl.company_id` when fetching the product accounts and preparing the move lines so the JE is always created in the company of the SVL being vacuumed.

opw-6066970
opw-6419188