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

Some generic validation errors raised by core account models lack enough context to identify which record caused the issue, making FEC imports harder to troubleshoot.

This commit improves the two error cases identified for this use case:
- `account.account._check_account_code` now includes the invalid account code in the error message.
- `account.move.write` now includes the move name/reference and displays human-readable field labels instead of technical field names when attempting to modify read-only fields on posted entries.

Although motivated by FEC import, these are generic core validations, so the improvements are implemented at the source to benefit all callers rather than only the FEC import flow.

Enrichment is scoped to the two cases above, other constraints/errors across these models are intentionally left unchanged for now, since editing core error messages more broadly should be done deliberately and on a case-by-case basis, not as a blanket rewrite

task-5346068

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282840
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281746

* = din5008_account_followup, din5008_industry_fsm

**Steps to reproduce:**

* Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`)
* Set the document layout to **DIN 5008** and generate any PDF report (invoice, quotation, purchase order, etc.).

**Observed behavior (date format):**

* All dates in the information block (Invoice Date, Due Date, Delivery Date, Order Date, etc.) are rendered in `yyyy-mm-dd` format instead of the expected `dd.MM.yyyy` format used in DE, AT, and CH.

**Cause (date format):**

* All `t-options="{'widget': 'date'}"` directives across the DIN 5008 template family rely on the active user's language locale for date formatting. If the user language is not `de_DE`, dates render in the locale's default format (e.g. `yyyy-mm-dd` for `en_US`).

**Fix (date format):**

* Add `'format': 'dd.MM.yyyy'` explicitly to all `t-options` date widgets across all DIN 5008 report templates (`l10n_din5008`, `l10n_din5008_sale`, `l10n_din5008_purchase`, `l10n_din5008_sale_subscription`, `l10n_din5008_repair`, `l10n_din5008_account_followup`, `l10n_din5008_industry_fsm`).
* This is correct for all three countries using DIN 5008 (DE, AT, CH), which all follow the `dd.MM.yyyy` convention.

opw-6392649

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128209
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126006

Steps to reproduce:
- Post a Peruvian invoice so it is sent to SUNAT (directly or through Estela/Digiflow).
- SUNAT's sendBill call hangs and Odoo's request times out (ReadTimeout / ConnectionError), even though SUNAT actually finishes registering the document on its side a moment later.
- Odoo retries sending the same invoice (either automatically through the EDI cron, or manually). SUNAT now replies with a "document already exists" SOAP fault (code 1033/4000), since it processed the previous attempt.
- Odoo tries to recover from this by fetching the CDR through getStatusCdr, but SUNAT has not finished generating it yet, so the lookup also fails.

Cause of the issue:
_l10n_pe_edi_post_invoice_web_service() already has recovery logic for error codes 1033/4000: it calls _l10n_pe_edi_retrieve_cdr() to fetch the CDR and treat the invoice as sent. But when that lookup itself fails (CDR not generated yet), the resulting error keeps the 'blocking_level' set to 'error' from the original SOAP fault. Documents with blocking_level 'error' are excluded from the automatic EDI cron retries (see account.edi.document._cron_process_documents_web_services), so the invoice gets stuck needing a manual retry, which can lose the same race against SUNAT again and again.

Solution:
When the CDR can't be retrieved yet after a 1033/4000 duplicate error, mark the result as 'blocking_level': 'warning' instead of leaving it at 'error'. This keeps the invoice eligible for the automatic EDI cron retries, so Odoo keeps polling SUNAT until the CDR becomes available, instead of requiring manual intervention every time this race is lost.

opw-6393231

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125053

The PstlAdr block written into pain.001 files never contains the
partner's state/province nor the second street line, even when they
are set on the record: _get_all_addr() now returns them, but
_get_PstlAdr() also needs to write them out. Some North American banks
reject wire transfers whose beneficiary address lacks the
state/province, so those payments fail regardless of how complete the
vendor record is.

Emit CtrySubDvsn when the address has a state, before Ctry as required
by the element order of the PostalAddress schema, and append street2
to the street address line.

Steps to reproduce:
- Install Accounting and enable a generic ISO 20022 payment method on
  a bank journal
- Create a vendor located in the US or Canada with a complete address,
  including the state and a second street line
- Register a vendor payment, add it to a batch and generate the
  pain.001 file
- The creditor PstlAdr has no state/province, and its street line only
  carries the first street field: the street2 part is dropped


Requires odoo/odoo#282518, which makes _get_all_addr() return the state and street2.

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128021
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127958

Steps to produce:
---
- Install sale_tiktok module.
- Create two active tiktok.shop records.
- Run the database neutralization command.

Issue:
---
- Neutralization fails with a PostgreSQL error:
 ```py
 duplicate key value violates unique constraint tiktok_shop_unique_active_shop`
 DETAIL: Key (tiktok_shop_ref)=(1) already exists.
```

Root cause:
---
- At [1], we are setting `tiktok_shop_ref = 1` for all `tiktok_shop` records. Because `tiktok_shop` enforces a partial unique constraint on `tiktok_shop_ref` for active shops [2], setting the same reference value `1` on multiple active shops violates this constraint.

Solution:
---
- Update sql to assign a row-unique string to each shop. This strips the real shop reference while maintaining uniqueness across active shop records so neutralization completes cleanly.

[1]https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/85754b0354b76da8b4d87a3a81dd19679ed35d15/sale_tiktok/data/neutralize.sql#L1-L8

[2]https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/85754b0354b76da8b4d87a3a81dd19679ed35d15/sale_tiktok/models/tiktok_shop.py#L136-L139

opw-6451715
---

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127532

* = de, din5008, din5008_purchase, din5008_repair, din5008_sale

**Steps to reproduce:**

* Install the **Germany - Accounting** (`l10n_de`) module (which pulls in `l10n_din5008`)
* Set the document layout to **DIN 5008** and generate any PDF report (invoice, quotation, purchase order, etc.).

**Observed behavior (date format):**

* All dates in the information block (Invoice Date, Due Date, Delivery Date, Order Date, etc.) are rendered in `yyyy-mm-dd` format instead of the expected `dd.MM.yyyy` format used in DE, AT, and CH.

**Observed behavior (commercial register):**

* The footer always shows `HRB-Nr.:` regardless of whether the company has a commercial register entry.
* The abbreviation `HRB-Nr.:` appears even for Austrian and Swiss companies, where the commercial register number is a German-specific concept.
* In the company form view, the field is labeled generically as "Company ID" instead of "Commercial Register Number" for German companies.

**Cause (date format):**

* All `t-options="{'widget': 'date'}"` directives across the DIN 5008 template family rely on the active user's language locale for date formatting. If the user language is not `de_DE`, dates render in the locale's default format (e.g. `yyyy-mm-dd` for `en_US`).

**Cause (commercial register):**

* The footer renders `company.company_registry` unconditionally with no country guard and no label.

**Fix (date format):**

* Add `'format': 'dd.MM.yyyy'` explicitly to all `t-options` date widgets across all DIN 5008 report templates (`l10n_din5008`, `l10n_din5008_sale`, `l10n_din5008_purchase`, `l10n_din5008_sale_subscription`, `l10n_din5008_repair`, `l10n_din5008_account_followup`, `l10n_din5008_industry_fsm`).
* This is correct for all three countries using DIN 5008 (DE, AT, CH), which all follow the `dd.MM.yyyy` convention.

**Fix (commercial register):**

* Remove the hardcoded `HRB-Nr.:` label from the footer and instead render `company.partner_id.company_registry_label` (which is country-aware).
* Update the duplicate contact warning message to use the country-aware label via `company.partner_id.company_registry_label`, backed by a new `_get_company_registry_labels` override in l10n_de that registers `Commercial Register Number` for `DE`.
* In the company form view (`l10n_de`), hide the generic "Company ID" field for German companies and show a relabeled instance with `string="Commercial Register Number"` instead.

opw-6392649

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282964
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279085

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#281413

_get_all_addr() feeds the postal address block of generated pain.001
payment files, but does not return the partner's state nor the second
street line. The beneficiary state/province and street complement
(suite, unit, ...) therefore never appear in the generated file, even
when they are set on the partner, and there is no way to fix it from
the record. Some North American banks reject wire transfers whose
beneficiary address lacks the state/province, so those payments fail
regardless of how complete the vendor record is.

Return the state code and street2 alongside the other address
components, from the partner for the base implementation and from the
employee private address for the hr one, so the payment engine can
write them in the PstlAdr block.

Steps to reproduce:
- Install Accounting and enable a generic ISO 20022 payment method on
  a bank journal
- Create a vendor located in the US or Canada with a complete address,
  including the state and a second street line
- Register a vendor payment, add it to a batch and generate the
  pain.001 file
- The creditor PstlAdr has no state/province, and its street line only
  carries the first street field: the street2 part is dropped


Companion enterprise PR emitting the state in the generated file: odoo/enterprise#127958

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282620
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282518