Wednesday, August 19, 2026
13 changes · saas-19.1
Resolved issues and error corrections
This fix prevents Mexican payroll processing from crashing when a company does not have a VAT number entered. It allows payslip checks to continue normally for companies with incomplete tax identifier information.
Original PR description
`res.company.vat` is not required and can be `False`. Guard the `len()` call so `_issue_mx_warnings` doesn't crash on payslips for companies without a VAT set.
```py
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py", line 1936, in _compute_issues
issues = generate_issue(slip, context)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py", line 235, in _issue_mx_warnings
if not slip.company_id.l10n_mx_curp and slip._l10n_mx_is_curp_needed():
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py", line 325, in _l10n_mx_is_curp_needed
or len(self.company_id.vat) == 13
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
TypeError: object of type 'bool' has no len()
```Invoice scanning now compares detected bank account numbers with a cleaned version of partner IBANs, ignoring spaces and punctuation. This helps match suppliers' bank details more accurately when scanned invoices use a standardized IBAN format.
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
This fixes an issue where the calendar could show the wrong weekday for users in time zones where daylight saving time starts at midnight. Calendar headers now display the correct sequence of days, avoiding confusion when planning around those dates.
Original PR description
Current behaviour: In the Calendar view (day/week/month scale), when the user's timezone observes a DST transition that starts exactly at local midnight (e.g. Africa/Cairo, since 2023), the day…
Current behaviour: In the Calendar view (day/week/month scale), when the user's timezone observes a DST transition that starts exactly at local midnight (e.g. Africa/Cairo, since 2023), the day column right after the transition gets the wrong weekday name, duplicating the previous day's name. For ex. it renders "... THU THU FRI ..." instead of "... THU FRI SAT ...", for the week surrounding April 30th 2027. To fix this we add 1 hour to the Date before reading its weekday/day from it, mirroring the workaround FullCalendar itself adopted for this same bug. It has no effect on any ordinary day (adding 1h to a correct local midnight stays within the same calendar day), and it cannot overshoot into the next day since no real-world DST gap exceeds that margin. Note: This is a known bug (https://github.com/fullcalendar/fullcalendar/issues/7633), fixed in FullCalendar v6.1.17, a major version ahead of the v4.4.0, so the fix can't be applied directly without a full library upgrade. opw-6370140 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279836 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279343
This change ensures that when a user clicks a mention suggestion in the message composer, the name shown on screen is the one inserted. It prevents cases where the typed search text could remain instead of the selected contact, improving reliability when mentioning people with special characters in their names.
Original PR description
Before this commit, clicking a composer suggestion could leave the composer with the typed search instead of the selected name, as in the test "Mention a partner with special character (e.g. apostrophe ')" on runbot: Failed to find 1 of ".o-mail-Composer-input" with value "..." (Timeout of 10 seconds). Found 0 instead. This happens because NavigableList looks up the clicked option by index in its current props, while the item clicked comes from the last render. Typing "@" lists the two members of the channel and typing "Pyn" drops one of them: owl assigns the filtered options one frame before it patches the list, so a click in between looks up index 1 in a list of one option, finds nothing and returns. This commit passes the rendered option to the click handler, keeping the index lookup as a fallback so that the signature stays the same on a stable version. https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/946154 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282897
Clicking a table of contents entry in the HTML editor now scrolls a bit further so the target heading is clearly visible, not just barely shown at the edge of the screen. This makes navigation in longer HTML content feel more reliable and easier to follow for users.
Original PR description
When clicking on a title in the TOC, we auto-scroll to that section of the HTML, allowing users to read that part. Since [1], scrollIntoView is replaced to consider top-aligned sticky elements. As a result, instead of scrolling to make it comfortable to read the section, it stops as soon as the title is visible. Unless you are really attentive at the bottom of the screen, it can look like the scrolling did not work. This commit computes the appropriate offset to make the TOC heading more visible after scrolling. [1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/f5cf8565e7d09edd3a29fd95537381fb70d75785 Task-6394193 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278304
This fixes an issue in the HTML editor where formatting from an outer table could incorrectly overwrite the colors of a table placed inside it. Business documents and web content with nested tables will now keep their intended visual styling after editing or normalization.
Original PR description
Problem: When a `table` with a `color`/`backgroundColor` contains a nested `table`, `distributeTableColorsToAllCells` propagates the outer table's color to every `td` in the subtree, including cells…
Problem:
When a `table` with a `color`/`backgroundColor` contains a nested `table`, `distributeTableColorsToAllCells` propagates the outer table's color to every `td` in the subtree, including cells belonging to the inner table. The inner table's own color is then discarded since its `td`s already have a value.
Cause:
`table.querySelectorAll("td")` returns every `td` in the entire subtree, not just the table's own direct cells.
Solution:
Scope the selected `td`s to `td.closest("table") === table`, so a table's color is only distributed to its own cells.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Add a `background-color` to an outer `table`.
2. Nest a `table` with a different `background-color` inside one of its cells.
3. Load/normalize the content in the editor.
4. Observe both tables' cells carry the outer table's color.
opw-6438972
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281850
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281413This change makes an automated image upload test more reliable by giving it a little more time to detect the uploaded image. It reduces random test failures on busy systems, helping keep build and deployment checks stable.
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
Currently, when the user attempts to create a delivery operation for a class X document type, the system prompts the user to provide values for the CAI and CAI Expiration Date fields. ## Steps to produce: - Install `l10n_ar_stock` with demo data - Switch Company to `(AR) Exento` - Create a warehouse - Configuration > Operation Types > Delivery Orders - Set Document Type to `'(94) MAILING X' `and try to save ## Observed Behavior: The fields 'CAI' and 'CAI Expiration Date', which repre
Original PR description
Currently, when the user attempts to create a delivery operation for a class X document type, the system prompts the user to provide values for the CAI and CAI Expiration Date fields. ## Steps to…
Currently, when the user attempts to create a delivery operation for a class X document type, the system prompts the user to provide values for the CAI and CAI Expiration Date fields. ## Steps to produce: - Install `l10n_ar_stock` with demo data - Switch Company to `(AR) Exento` - Create a warehouse - Configuration > Operation Types > Delivery Orders - Set Document Type to `'(94) MAILING X' `and try to save ## Observed Behavior: The fields 'CAI' and 'CAI Expiration Date', which represent the authorization code and expiration date issued by the government, are currently configured as required fields. **Expected Behavior:** As specified on the [government site](https://www.argentina.gob.ar/normativa/nacional/resoluci%C3%B3n-1415-2003-81316/actualizacion#:~:text=Los%20datos%20indicados%20en%20el%20inciso%20a%29%2C%20puntos%207%2C%2010%2C%2011%2C%2012%20y%2013%2C%20s%C3%B3lo%20ser%C3%A1n%20para%20los%20remitos%20clase%20%27R%27%2E): > > 12. Printing authorization code, preceded by the acronym 'CAI No. ...'. > 13. Expiration date of the receipt, preceded by the legend 'Expiration Date ...' > > 'The data indicated in section a), points 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13, will only be for 'R' class delivery notes.' These statements indicate that the information mentioned in points 12 and 13, including the **CAI** and **CAI Expiration Date** fields, is applicable only to **'R'** class delivery notes. Therefore, for class X delivery notes, these fields should be optional rather than required. ## Root Cause: According to [1], the field is configured as a required field when a Document Type ID is selected. This configuration causes the **CAI** and **CAI Expiration Date** fields to become mandatory, regardless of the document type requirements defined by the government specification. [1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/62b05c4ea61942072b6b1fb420fe3efedb11ed14/addons/l10n_ar_stock/views/stock_picking_type_views.xml#L11-L16 ## Solution: Apply constraints that align with the government specifications, allowing the CAI and CAI Expiration Date fields to remain optional for document types where they are not required. opw-6359503 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275533
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
Issue: --- Authorize payment tokenization doesn't work. Steps: 1- Setup authorize payment provider. 2- Using portal page, add a new payment method for the user. The created payment method is not saved. Cause: --- The issue was introduced in efc2788dfccd13ee6feb309430ff57e49664ff97. Before that, we were calling `_tokenize` before voiding the tx. In that PR, the `_tokenize` call was moved to `_process()`, after `_apply_updates()`. So now what happens is that we void the tx, then ca
Original PR description
Issue: --- Authorize payment tokenization doesn't work. Steps: 1- Setup authorize payment provider. 2- Using portal page, add a new payment method for the user. The created payment method is not…
Issue: --- Authorize payment tokenization doesn't work. Steps: 1- Setup authorize payment provider. 2- Using portal page, add a new payment method for the user. The created payment method is not saved. Cause: --- The issue was introduced in efc2788dfccd13ee6feb309430ff57e49664ff97. Before that, we were calling `_tokenize` before voiding the tx. In that PR, the `_tokenize` call was moved to `_process()`, after `_apply_updates()`. So now what happens is that we void the tx, then call `_tokenize()`. Inside tokenize we try to create a customer profile, which fails because the tx is already voided. Fix: --- We can fix it by calling `_tokenize()` once before voiding the tx. The redundant tokenize call inside the general payment tx `_process` is rendered ineffective by two safeguards: 1- There is a check for `tx.tokenize`, which neutralizes double tokenization: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fffd987cc98d1ea0cd04e24dda2ed8b64a219cdc/addons/payment/models/payment_transaction.py#L754-L755 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fffd987cc98d1ea0cd04e24dda2ed8b64a219cdc/addons/payment/models/payment_transaction.py#L893-L896 2- If `token_id` is already set, no token value is returned: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/fffd987cc98d1ea0cd04e24dda2ed8b64a219cdc/addons/payment_authorize/models/payment_transaction.py#L237-L243 opw-6426847 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281014
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 te
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#282719## Current behavior: On a Monday–Friday working schedule, a Daily accrual plan that is based on worked time grants accrued time on Saturday as well, even though Saturday is not a working day. The employee accrues on 6 days per week instead of 5 (Sunday is correctly skipped. Only Saturday is wrong). ## Expected behavior: The employee accrues only on the 5 working days (Mon–Fri) → 5 grants per week. Saturday and Sunday should add nothing. ## Setup: - Working schedule: Standard 40h/week, M
Original PR description
## Current behavior: On a Monday–Friday working schedule, a Daily accrual plan that is based on worked time grants accrued time on Saturday as well, even though Saturday is not a working day. The…
## Current behavior: On a Monday–Friday working schedule, a Daily accrual plan that is based on worked time grants accrued time on Saturday as well, even though Saturday is not a working day. The employee accrues on 6 days per week instead of 5 (Sunday is correctly skipped. Only Saturday is wrong). ## Expected behavior: The employee accrues only on the 5 working days (Mon–Fri) → 5 grants per week. Saturday and Sunday should add nothing. ## Setup: - Working schedule: Standard 40h/week, Monday–Friday, 08:00–17:00. - All timezones set to Australia/Brisbane (UTC+10) and matching: employee, working schedule, and user are all the same timezone. - Accrual plan milestone: accrue 5 Hours, Daily, "At the end of the accrual period", "Based on worked time = Yes". ## Steps to reproduce: - Create the working schedule and accrual plan above, with the calendar timezone set to Australia/Brisbane. - Assign the accrual allocation to an employee, Starting on a Monday. - On the Time Off dashboard, use "Balance at the (date)" to project the balance day by day across a weekend (Friday → Saturday → Sunday → Monday). ## Cause of the issue: Accrual period boundaries were built as naive UTC midnights instead of local calendar midnights. ## Fix: Localize accrual period boundaries in the employee/resource timezone before calling resource calendar APIs. This bug is reproducible in multiple versions. PRs for: - v19.0: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/279029 - v18.0: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/279036 opw-6316062 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279029
**Steps to reproduce:** 1. Install Sales and payment_authorize modules 2. Enable "Online Payment" in the settings and Configure the payment method to be Authorize.net 3. Create a sale order, confirm it and create the invoice 4. Pay the invoice with an eCheck (ACH) payment method through the Authorize.net provider 5. Wait for the payment to be settled by Authorize.net (_around 24 hours_) 6. Initiate a refund of the payment **Issue:** The refund fails with error `E00003: "The 'AnetApi/xm
Original PR description
**Steps to reproduce:** 1. Install Sales and payment_authorize modules 2. Enable "Online Payment" in the settings and Configure the payment method to be Authorize.net 3. Create a sale order, confirm…
**Steps to reproduce:** 1. Install Sales and payment_authorize modules 2. Enable "Online Payment" in the settings and Configure the payment method to be Authorize.net 3. Create a sale order, confirm it and create the invoice 4. Pay the invoice with an eCheck (ACH) payment method through the Authorize.net provider 5. Wait for the payment to be settled by Authorize.net (_around 24 hours_) 6. Initiate a refund of the payment **Issue:** The refund fails with error `E00003: "The 'AnetApi/xml/v1/schema/AnetApiSchema.xsd:cardNumber' element is invalid - The value XX is invalid according to its datatype 'String' - The actual length is less than the MinLength value` **Expected behavior:** The refund should be processed successfully regardless of whether the original payment was made by credit card or eCheck (ACH) **Why this happens:** - The `refund()` method in `AuthorizeAPI` builds the refund request using a `creditCard` payment payload - When the original transaction was an ACH/eCheck payment, the `creditCard` key is absent from the transaction details returned by Authorize.net - The resulting request is rejected by Authorize.net because it does not satisfy the minimum length constraint for `cardNumber` **Fix:** - Detects whether the original payment used `creditCard` or `bankAccount` from the transaction details and build the appropriate payload according to Authorize.net API documentation: https://developer.authorize.net/api/reference/index.html#payment-transactions-credit-a-bank-account opw-6359726 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277742