#### Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
The "Request Appraisals" server action on hr.employee calls model._create_multi_appraisals(), a method that no longer exists. Running it raises AttributeError: 'hr.employee' object has no attribute '_create_multi_appraisals'.

#### Current behavior before PR:
Commit 8845eb2ac29 replaced the multi-appraisal flow with hr.appraisal.campaign.wizard: it deleted _create_multi_appraisals and repointed the employee list header button to action_open_appraisal_campaign_wizard, but left the action_create_multi_appraisals record in hr_appraisal/views/hr_employee_views.xml. Its code is now the only reference to the deleted method, so the action crashes whenever it is run.

#### Desired behavior after PR is merged:
The dangling action is gone. Requesting appraisals for several employees at once is done with the "Launch Campaign" button already present in the Employees list view; action_open_appraisal_campaign_wizard reads active_ids when active_model is hr.employee and pre-fills the selected employees.

Nothing references the removed xml id, and the record is not noupdate, so _process_end removes it from existing databases on update; no migration script is required. Verified on a 19.0 database: with the orphan record loaded, updating hr_appraisal with this change deletes it.

opw-6408609

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125630

Issue:
Swiss payslips count one extra absence day for employees without a working schedule. A one day accident leave can therefore be prorated as two days, reducing the regular wage and overstating the accident salary.

Steps to reproduce:
* Install Swiss Payroll.
* Configure a monthly employee without a working schedule.
* Assign one day of accident time off.
* Generate the payslip for that month.

Cause:
The Swiss wage computation derives absence boundaries from the date portion of the leave's UTC datetimes: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/16c29e1bab34b5bcb2b001477d928ec5eb294a97/l10n_ch_hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L313-L330

A fully flexible employee's full day leave starts at local midnight. In timezones ahead of UTC, that start is stored on the previous UTC date, so the inclusive calendar day computation adds an extra day.

Solution:
We need to use the requested time off dates for both payslip range filtering and absence proration. These fields preserve the calendar days selected by the user independently of timezone conversion, while leaving the UTC datetimes and half-day handling unchanged.

opw-6435086

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127513

**Problem:**
The running timesheet timer in the systray stops when the Odoo server clock passes UTC midnight, even though it is still the same day in the user's own timezone.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Set the user's timezone to one behind UTC (e.g. America/Guadeloupe, UTC-4).
2. Start a timesheet timer while it is before local midnight but after the server has passed UTC midnight (e.g. 20:00 local = 00:00 UTC).
3. Look at the running timer in the systray.

**Current behavior:**
At server (UTC) midnight the running timer disappears and its ongoing count is lost.

**Expected behavior:**
The timer keeps running until the user's own local midnight, regardless of the server timezone.

**Cause of the issue:**
The systray controller derives its reference day from `date.today()`, which returns the server's (UTC) local date. The running timer's timesheet is created dated the user's local day (`hr_timesheet` uses `fields.Date.context_today`). Once the server crosses UTC midnight, `date.today()` advances to the next day while the user's local day has not, so `timesheet_systray_user_data` (searching `date == today`) and `get_timer_start_time` (searching `date` within today's bounds) no longer match the running timesheet, and the systray reports no running timer.

**Fix:**
Deriving the reference day from `fields.Date.context_today` aligns the systray's notion of "today" with the timezone the timesheet was recorded in, so the timer is tied to the user's local day rather than the server's. This keeps recording and retrieval consistent, since the timesheet is already dated with the user-local day on creation.

opw-6343442

`user_domain` (in the context) is supposed to contain the domain defined
by the user (in the search bar). It was not the case for all gantt
views, and produced inconsistent results, as that domain is used to know
when to display the employees without leaves/attendances.

The PR fixes that issue by creating the `HrGanttModel` class, that takes
care of defining the `user_domain` correctly.

This class also disables the *Group By* menu, and defaults to grouping
by employees. This was decided for the following reasons:
- All gantt views inheriting this class would group by employee
- Grouping by other fields would already not work in some cases
- It's very difficult to add employees without records if the gantt is
grouped by multiple fields at once

Affected `_get_gantt_data()` functions have been adapted accordingly

The access models (the ones defined in the `access.csv` files) are
implied, and thus never passed as a parameter to `get_gantt_data()`, so
we need to also manually add them when converting the model to the
related field used in `groupby`

task-5502544

1- The benefit fields related to the hr.version have a domain that limits them to the whitelisted fields used to copy values from a template, which does not always include benefit fields. The advantage of the whitelist is that it factored in for the allowed countries, so instead of duplicating this logic to benefit fields and implementing it in every l10n, we can check which module the field comes from.

example:
The field [`company_car_total_depreciated_cost`](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ce691cd6aaacfb86cd866698d2fcc3fe930912cb/l10n_be_hr_payroll_fleet/models/hr_version.py#L62) cannot be selected as `res_field_id` when it should be possible as we see in the [data](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/ce691cd6aaacfb86cd866698d2fcc3fe930912cb/l10n_be_hr_contract_salary/data/hr_contract_salary_benefit_data.xml#L6), it is not whitelisted because we dont want to copy its value from a template.

2- Another fix is the inverse of the public field, there's a traceback because the selection field is always converted to a string and cannot be used to browse as is.
```py
  File "/data/build/enterprise/hr_contract_salary/models/hr_contract_salary_benefit.py", line 238, in _inverse_res_field_public
    record.res_field_id = self.sudo().env['ir.model.fields'].browse(record.res_field_public)
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/data/build/odoo/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 1890, in __set__
    write_value = self.convert_to_write(value, records)
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/data/build/odoo/odoo/orm/fields_relational.py", line 387, in convert_to_write
    return value.id
           ^^^^^^^^
  File "/data/build/odoo/odoo/orm/fields_misc.py", line 115, in __get__
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % record) from None
ValueError: Expected singleton: ir.model.fields('1', '7', '3', '8', '4')
```

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127743

When the AI agent switched from another view to a pivot view, the pivot view
could crash or open without any active measures.

The AI controller patch applies the agent's adjustments upon receiving the
`APPLY_AI_ADJUST_MODEL` bus event. However, the event could be processed while
the pivot model was still executing `_loadData()`.

In that case, the following sequence occurred:

* `_loadData()` started and awaited.
* The controller patch was executed.
* The patch called `toggleMeasures()`.
* `toggleMeasures()` waited for `_loadData()` to complete.
* `_loadData()` finished and updated the metadata with the available measures.
* `toggleMeasures()` resumed and wrote back the metadata snapshot it had taken
before waiting.

Since `toggleMeasures()` operates on a snapshot of the metadata, the measures
populated by `_loadData()` were lost when the snapshot replaced the current
metadata, leaving the pivot model without its `measures` metadata and causing
the view to crash.

Prevent this race condition by waiting for the pivot model initialization to
complete before applying the AI adjustments.

Also preserve the default active measures when the AI agent does not explicitly
request any measures instead of clearing them and opening an empty pivot view.

task-6384368

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125897

**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

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

### 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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277790

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

## Description

When a CI/NIE number fails the check digit validation, the raised error suggests `3:402.010-2 or 93:402.010-1 (CI or NIE)` as the expected format. This is misleading for two reasons:

- The colon notation comes from Uruware's technical manual and is not how identity card numbers are written in Uruguay: users write `3.402.010-1` or plain digits (`34020101`). Real users facing the error keep reformatting a number whose check digit is simply wrong, believing the problem is the format.
- The CI example shown is itself an **invalid** number: the check digit of `3.402.010` is `1`, not `2` — the module's own test suite (`l10n_uy/tests/test_check_vat.py`) uses `3:402.010-2` as an invalid sample.

This was reported by an Uruguayan eCommerce user who lost sales because buyers interpreted the message as requiring an unusual format that does not exist in Uruguay.

## Change

Replace the examples with valid numbers written in the notations actually used in Uruguay, and clarify that separators are optional — which is exactly what `_l10n_uy_ci_nie_is_valid()` already accepts (it strips `:. ,-` before checking the verification digit):

```
3.402.010-1 or 34020101 (CI), 93.402.010-1 (NIE); dots and dash are optional
```

Only the `expected_format` string changes; the validation logic is untouched. Existing tests only assert the fixed part of the message (`The CI/NIE number.*does not seem to be valid`), so they are unaffected.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282489

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282919

### 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

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#282705
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278620

Steps to produce:
---
- Install `sales` module.
- Go to Settings and enable `Units of Measure and Packaging`.
- Set a long name for `units` UoM.
- Create a Sale Order and add a product via the catalog.

Issue:
---
- Long UoM names are not fully visible in the catalog view.

Root cause:
---
- The outer `<div>` has `d-flex` but lacks `w-100`, causing it to overflow
  its container.

Solution:
---
- Added `w-100` to the outer `<div>` to prevent overflow.
- Adjusted the quantity selector layout for better visibility.

Before:
---
<img width="388" height="141" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/dafae08a-3c9d-4163-8894-daa2e4d26f62" />

After:
---
<img width="382" height="154" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/abd6f034-be4b-49bf-be9c-c9779de0f30d" />

Enterprise PR: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/121139

opw-6253382

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282565
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#267118