Wednesday, August 19, 2026
13 changes · saas-18.3
Enhancements to existing features
This change increases the default wait time used by web interface tests so they are less likely to fail on busy or slower machines. It aligns these waits with existing test behavior and improves confidence in automated test results without affecting normal successful runs.
Original PR description
Before this commit, waitFor, waitForNone and waitUntil gave the DOM 200 milliseconds, which the loop turns into 12 animation frames, while contains() and expect.waitForSteps sitting in the same tests…
Before this commit, waitFor, waitForNone and waitUntil gave the DOM 200 milliseconds, which the loop turns into 12 animation frames, while contains() and expect.waitForSteps sitting in the same tests give 10 seconds. 430 call sites in addons reach these three helpers and 29 pass an explicit timeout, so 12 frames is what the other 401 get. The problem is that 12 frames is less than what the client needs on a loaded machine. Measured on "should remove file from html editor if removed from attachment list", on the wait that follows the Full composer button: - 5 to 7 frames on an idle machine; - 11 to 18 frames over 8 runs with the machine at load 10 to 20, 5 of the 8 above the 12 frames the default allows. Those 5 are failing runs, and the same test at load 13 to 29 fails 6 runs out of 6 with the 200 milliseconds, 0 out of 6 with 10 seconds. Note that a longer timeout costs nothing on a green build: the wait ends on the frame the DOM matches, so it only delays the report of a test that was going to fail anyway. Hoot fails the test itself after 5 seconds, 15 in test_js.py, which keeps bounding a wait that never resolves. This commit raises the default to 10 seconds, the delay a tour step already gets in macro.js and the one contains() and expect.waitForSteps already have. https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/946094 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282702
Resolved issues and error corrections
Fixed an issue where embedded document actions linked to accounting journals could be incorrectly removed during automated cleanup when users were working in a different company. This helps preserve configured document shortcuts in multi-company setups.
Original PR description
Step to reproduce: - You must have at least 2 companies with an account Journal - Create a New Journal Entry actions (child or parent) - Embed it to a folder - Set your company on a different one than the journal's one - Run the Garbage collector cron (Base: Auto-vacuum internal data) - The embed action has been removed The cause of this is that in the `_get_base_server_actions_domain` method in `documents_account` module there is a check on company to avoid using/running the actions when not in the right company. But the garbage collector don't need to have this check. Task-6147618
Invoice scanning now compares detected bank account numbers against a cleaned version of partner IBANs, ignoring spaces and punctuation. This helps match vendors more reliably when stored bank details use different formatting.
Original PR description
When looking for a matching IBAN, we were searching on the `acc_number` field, which can contain spaces or special characters (dots, dashes, etc). But the OCR always returns the IBAN in a sanitized format, without any space or special characters, so it should be compared against the sanitized IBAN of the partners. task-none (issue found by chance) Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127775
Opening spreadsheet version history now uses the correct type of database transaction. This avoids an unnecessary retry when contributor information is updated, making the action smoother and more reliable for users.
Original PR description
The get_spreadsheet_history method is marked as readonly, causing RPC requests to use a read-only transaction. However, retrieving the metadata of a document spreadsheet updates its spreadsheet contributors. Opening the version history consequently attempts an UPDATE in a read-only transaction and forces the request to be retried with a read-write cursor. Remove the readonly decorator so the request uses a read-write cursor directly. Task-6176364
Payment XML files now use uppercase encoding labels to satisfy stricter bank validation rules. This helps avoid warnings or rejections from providers such as SIX in Switzerland, while keeping the file content unchanged.
Original PR description
The W3C recommendations for XML state that the encoding defined for an XML document should not be case-sensitive. However, some banking providers (SIX for Switzerland) are stricter and may throw warnings or errors if upper-case is not used. https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/#NT-EncodingDecl opw-4948708 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125947 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125807
This change makes the peer-to-peer connection test wait until the full set of connections is established before measuring the result. It prevents random test failures on busy or slower machines, improving confidence in the chat system’s reliability.
Original PR description
Before this commit, "mesh peer to peer connections" fails at random on a loaded machine, counting fewer connections than its ten users make:
[toBe] expected values to be strictly equal
> Expected: 90
> Received: 81
This happens because the test counts the peers as soon as its addPeer calls resolve. addPeer awaits the readiness promise of the peer, which also resolves, with false, when that peer is disconnected. A connection slow to open reaches the recovery watchdog, which tells the other side to drop the peer, drops it locally and adds it back without awaiting it. The awaited promises can therefore all be settled while recovered peers are still connecting.
This commit waits for the mesh to reach its full size before counting, so that a recovery in flight no longer decides the result. With the browser CPU throttled, the test fails about half of its runs before this commit, and none after.
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282719This update removes an old, unused view attribute from the Philippine 2307 wizard form. It does not change how the form works, but it keeps the configuration cleaner and avoids compatibility issues with newer Odoo versions.
Original PR description
The `modifiers` attribute was used in older Odoo versions to define field properties (invisible, readonly, required, etc.) Since the field already declares these same properties directly…
The `modifiers` attribute was used in older Odoo versions to define field properties (invisible, readonly, required, etc.) Since the field already declares these same properties directly [state](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/14.0/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L150-L155) , [amount_tax_signed](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/14.0/addons/account/models/account_move.py#L229)
(e.g. `invisible=...`, `readonly=...`), the `modifiers` attribute is redundant and serves no purpose.
This attribute was never added manually by us — it was auto-generated by Odoo Studio when the default view was created. Studio's default views inject `modifiers` alongside the direct attributes. [Here](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/104741/changes/975e875046691c898e8c1acb87d3626cd299e5aa#diff-dfebe5a93e1b8880e88268b024be4c6f106d144b20298d7bb6c4ae09a18bafd0L67-L145)
Also the `modifiers` attribute was fully simplified [removed](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/104741/changes/975e875046691c898e8c1acb87d3626cd299e5aa#diff-849f1ed2a35a8b0b9cdd67f8e34de5d2ea7bf928103a83828587ba7ec14a62e4L52) starting from version 17.0, where views rely exclusively on direct attribute expressions (`invisible`, `readonly`, `required`) instead of the `modifiers` JSON encoding [main Patch](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/104741) Keeping it around in the arch is therefore dead code with no effect.
However it needs to give the error on 17.0+ like this
```
ERROR LOG:
<string>:1:0:ERROR:RELAXNGV:RELAXNG_ERR_NOELEM: Expecting an element data, got nothing
<string>:1:0:ERROR:RELAXNGV:RELAXNG_ERR_INVALIDATTR: Invalid attribute modifiers for element field
<string>:1:0:ERROR:RELAXNGV:RELAXNG_ERR_EXTRACONTENT: Element tree has extra content: field
```
As the modifer has been remove from the field [common.rng](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/104741/changes/975e875046691c898e8c1acb87d3626cd299e5aa#diff-849f1ed2a35a8b0b9cdd67f8e34de5d2ea7bf928103a83828587ba7ec14a62e4L52) RelaxNG schema but modifiers set on fields here root tag is **form**, and the modifiers sit on fields inside a nested list. And Form views aren't RNG-validated from 17.0 till now —
[@validate('calendar', 'graph', 'pivot', 'search', 'list', 'activity')](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f0e58b9324af18d0cf0264aec2886d098e997f03/odoo/tools/view_validation.py#L314) has no form, and there's no [form_view.rng](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/tree/19.0/odoo/addons/base/rng).
Current senario
<img width="998" height="415" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1a678c8f-8401-4e12-826f-9e98f6f2fe20" />
After removing the modifer: it show the same view because of field property
<img width="998" height="415" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1a678c8f-8401-4e12-826f-9e98f6f2fe20" />
After removing the modifer still it shows the **modifiers="{'readonly':true, 'required':true}"** because the modifer is stay in the 14.0 but the 17.0 onwards it was not please see the scrrenshot its field preprty always.
<img width="1003" height="462" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5e833924-b17c-417f-9e63-5a01c185f588" />
This Fix removes the unused `modifiers` attribute from the view arch, keeping only the direct attribute already present, with no functional change to the view's behavior.
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#281271
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279976This change increases the waiting time in an automated image upload test so it has enough time to detect the uploaded image on slower systems. It helps prevent random test failures without changing the actual user experience.
Original PR description
Before this commit, this image field test sometimes failed because it could not find the image that had just been uploaded. Similarly to [1], we increase the waitFor timeout to 1s. Indeed, uploading an image can take time, and with high CPU usage, it could happen that the default 200ms delay wasn't enough. [1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/168196 runbot error-242406 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#281200
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 sec
Original PR description
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. -…
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 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273099
Before this commit, the full composer tour can fail on the step that drops a file on the composer, waiting for a `.o-Dropzone` that never shows. This happens because the channel mention list is sometimes still open when the tour drags the file in. The composer gets no dropzone then, as a dropzone only shows when the UI active element contains its target, and the open mention list is the UI active element. The dropzone is only updated on the drag events, therefore closing the mention list neve
Original PR description
Before this commit, the full composer tour can fail on the step that drops a file on the composer, waiting for a `.o-Dropzone` that never shows. This happens because the channel mention list is sometimes still open when the tour drags the file in. The composer gets no dropzone then, as a dropzone only shows when the UI active element contains its target, and the open mention list is the UI active element. The dropzone is only updated on the drag events, therefore closing the mention list never brings it back. Note that the same race is reported on saas-19.1, where the tour crashes on `dispatchEvent` of null instead, as the `dragFiles` helper there queries the dropzone once where `dropFiles` waits for it. This commit waits for the mention list to close before the drag. https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/946097 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282716
Calling `/shop/payment/validate` as a portal user with an empty cart confirms the empty sale order. Steps to reproduce: - Sign in as a portal user. - Add a product to the cart. - Remove the product. - Go to `/shop/payment/validate`. - The empty sale order is confirmed. opw-6430637 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282335 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280924
Original PR description
Calling `/shop/payment/validate` as a portal user with an empty cart confirms the empty sale order. Steps to reproduce: - Sign in as a portal user. - Add a product to the cart. - Remove the product. - Go to `/shop/payment/validate`. - The empty sale order is confirmed. opw-6430637 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282335 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280924
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 journa
Original PR description
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…
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 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#259133
### 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
Original PR description
### 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…
### 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
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269509