Steps to reproduce:
--------------------------
1. Install helpdesk_planning_field_service_sale_timesheet and website with demo data.
2. Open a helpdesk team (e.g., Customer Care) and enable field service planning.
3. Create a new ticket in Customer Care, plan two interventions, and mark them as completed.
4. Click the cog menu of the helpdesk ticket and click Preview.

Issue:
-------
The "Field service" button is not visible.

Cause:
-------
Earlier, portal card visibility and existence were controlled directly in the QWeb template. After the portal refactoring, their visibility and existence are now managed by `portal.entry` records.

As a result, the field service entry is incorrectly considered unavailable, causing the test to fail on runbot.
Related build: https://runbot.odoo.com/runbot/build/123497806

Fix:
------
Determine the visibility of the "Field service" portal entry using the corresponding `portal.entry` record.
(Similar https://github.com/odoo-dev/odoo/commit/84ccbded9f4f1f00359b2eef59bce9527368fb05)

Related pr: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/129227

opw-6481737

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129860

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

When importing a SODA XML file, users without the Analytic Accounting
group encounter an access rights error even if Analytic Accounting is not
enabled.

This occurs because the import wizard reads the `analytic_account_id` field
on the `soda.analytic.mapping` model to build an internal dictionary of
departments. Because this field is restricted to the Analytic Accounting
group, the evaluation of this field crashes the import for users even when
the Analytic Accounting feature is disabled.

This commit resolves the issue by using `.sudo()` on the analytic mapping
recordset to bypass the field-level group restriction.

**Steps to reproduce:**

- Log in as Mitchell Admin, change company to “My Belgian Company”
- Settings > Users & Companies > Users > Mitchell Admin > Access Rights > Extra Rights > ensure “Analytic Accounting” is unchecked
   - Also ensure Mitchell Admin is not part of the “Analytic Accounting” group
- Accounting Dashboard > remove “Favorites” from filter > drag & drop a SODA XML file to “Miscellaneous Operations” > save > observe Access Error


**Current behavior before PR:**

- Users who don't belong to the Analytic Accounting group encounter an access error when attempting to import SODA XML files, even when the Analytic Accounting feature isn't enabled

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

- Those users no longer receive an access error

opw-6376039

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127867

Before this commit, clicking a notification of an inaccessible record in the messaging menu opened no dialog, and the nightly build failed on

    FAILED: [4/8] Tour access_inbox_records_tour -> Step .o_dialog
    .o-mail-Message-body:text(Message in inaccessible record).
    Element has not been found.

This happens because the messaging menu shows the message in a dialog from the rejected promise of the action, while the action service restores the controller displayed before the failure, and `_updateUI` closes every dialog at the end of a restore. A dialog the user had opened before the failed click is closed the same way.

This only shows since "[IMP] web, project: enable test_documents_full eslint" *: the group check that commit moves to the end of a cog menu `isDisplayed` ran on every view, and its await delayed the mount of the controller, so the stack was still empty when the error arrived and the error path restored nothing.

This commit fixes the issue by keeping the dialogs open when the restore recovers from a controller error, as such a restore brings back the controller that was already displayed.

https://runbot.odoo.com/odoo/error/946461

* https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/284082

Steps to reproduce:
- Have a paid order with a product ordered once
- Open the ticket screen, select that order and its line
- Scan a product barcode with a keyboard-wedge scanner

Issue:
"Maximum Exceeded - The requested quantity to be refunded is higher than the ordered quantity. 6 is requested while only 1 can be refunded." When the line holds enough quantity no dialog is shown at all and a refund quantity taken from the barcode is silently set.

Cause:
A keyboard-wedge scanner types the barcode as a burst of keystrokes. The number buffer discards such bursts by waiting
barcodeService.maxTimeBetweenKeysInMs before handling the keys it collected and dropping any batch of more than two, but only when its holder asks for it with `useWithBarcode`. TicketScreen never set the flag, so its buffer handled every keystroke on its own and the digits of the barcode reached _setToRefundDetail as the refund quantity. ProductScreen, OrderSummary and PaymentScreen all set it.

Fix:
Set `useWithBarcode: true` on the ticket screen number buffer. Since the keys are now handled with a delay, capture the buffer before the selected order or orderline changes, so that a keystroke is applied to the line that was selected when it was typed and not to the next one.

opw-6465148

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#285083
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281962

*=account, hr_timesheet, loyalty, mrp_subcontracting, project, purchase, sale, website_crm_partner_assign

Steps to reproduce:
1. install sale
2. Create and confirm a sale order for a portal user
3. Login as a portal user
4. Open sale orders

Issue:
- Breadcrumbs are not visible beside the title.

Cause:
- After this commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/bba2fc505f5d0b4770eacc6877155b1aeda6d772
Variables are passed as attributes directly on the element, but breadcrumbs_searchbar
was passed to portal_layout, but the nested portal_searchbar no longer received it.
As a result, portal list pages rendered their title instead of the breadcrumb home link.

Solution:
- Pass breadcrumbs_searchbar directly to portal_searchbar

Alternative:
- An alternative would be to propagate t-call parameters to slot content
in QWeb or changes the condition for breadcrumbs visibility

related enterprise pr: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/118352

opw-6232899

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#266020

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

`avatar.mixin._avatar_generate_svg()` generates an auto-initial SVG avatar for any record without a real uploaded image (used by `res.partner`, `res.users`, and anything else inheriting `avatar.mixin`). The generated SVG opens with a single-quoted XML declaration: `<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8' ?>`.

When this content is served via `/web/image/...`, `guess_mimetype()` needs to determine its Content-Type since it's a computed value with no stored attachment metadata. On systems where the installed `libmagic` library classifies that specific single-quoted byte pattern as `text/xml` rather than `image/svg+xml`, the wrong Content-Type reaches the browser.

**Current behavior before PR:**

On affected `libmagic` versions/databases, an auto-generated avatar (a contact or user with no uploaded photo) gets served with `Content-Type: application/octet-stream` (or `text/xml`) instead of `image/svg+xml`. Browsers can't render that inline as an image, so instead of showing the colored-initial avatar, the browser downloads it as an unrecognized file. This affects any place these avatars are displayed: contact/user form and kanban views, chatter message authors, Discuss, etc.

Confirmed reproducible with `libmagic` 538 (`python-magic`), where the single-quoted declaration is classified as `text/xml`, while the exact same content with double-quoted attributes is correctly classified as `image/svg+xml`.

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**

`_avatar_generate_svg()` now generates its markup with double-quoted attributes throughout, which is correctly sniffed as `image/svg+xml` regardless of the installed `libmagic` version. Auto-generated avatars render inline in the browser as intended.

No other code depends on the exact quoting of this generated SVG - `res_users.py` and `hr_employee.py` both only assign the returned bytes to an image field without inspecting their content. Avatar fields are computed and non-stored, so nothing needs to be migrated - every record gets the corrected markup on its very next read, with no backfill required.

Updated the two existing `test_avatar_mixin.py` tests that asserted the exact (single-quoted) SVG string, and added `test_generated_partner_avatar_mimetype` to assert the generated avatar is actually sniffed as `image/svg+xml`, so this can't silently regress. Ran locally: all 6 tests in `TestAvatarMixin` pass.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#285081
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#283149

Issue before this commit:
=========================
When a lot-valuation-enabled product uses FIFO costing and all quantities from
a lot are consumed, the lot's standard price is reset to 0.

Steps to Reproduce:
=========================
- Install the stock_account and purchase modules.
- Create a lot-tracked product and enable Valuation by Lot/Serial, 
  set FIFO as the costing method.
- Create a PO for 5 units of the product with a unit price of 5.
- Receive the products and check the lot's standard price; it is set to 5.
- Sell all the product quantity for that product.
- Open the lot form.

Observation:
The lot's standard price (cost) is reset to 0.

Cause of the issue:
=========================
In this [PR](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/276163), the FIFO valuation logic computes the standard price using:
- std_price = value / quantity if quantity else 0

When the lot quantity becomes 0, the quantity used for this computation is also 0. 
As a result, the standard price is reset to 0 even though the lot's historical cost is still relevant.

With This Commit:
=========================
Keep the lot's standard price when its quantity reaches 0, instead of resetting it to 0.

Steps to reproduce:
- create a "Buy 2 Take 1" program whose rule and reward both target a product tag containing several products
- in the PoS, add one of the tagged products to the order
- set its quantity to 3 with the numpad

Issue:
The free product is not given. Clicking the product a third time instead of typing the quantity does give it, and so does a program whose reward is a single product.

Cause:
A reward whose products come from a tag is multi_product, so getClaimableRewards never computes its unclaimed quantity and the auto claim of updateRewards skips it: which product to give out is unknown. The only place claiming such a reward is addLineToCurrentOrder, which resolves it with the product that was just added. Setting a quantity does not go through it, hence the difference.

Fix:
Resolve the reward product the same way when auto claiming: the product of the line being worked on, or, failing that, the only reward product the order contains. The reward then follows the quantity of any of the tagged products, not only of the first one added, and the cashier is still asked when the order does not settle the choice.

opw-6430385

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284777

## Steps to reproduce:
	- Install Planning and Employee
	- Create a working schedule for example 38h/week (8h,8h,8h,8h,6h)
	- Create two employees and assign the created working schedule to them
	- Create a shift in planning for the two employees for a week
	- Notice in gantt view the total allocated hours for each day are not calculated correctly

## Cause:
When calculating each cell's duration we fetch the resources' intervals while doing this here https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1851d3046682020686f517dec3c744d88a38b049/planning/static/src/views/planning_gantt/planning_gantt_renderer.js#L354-L359 we loop over the first interval and instead of pushing to the intervals we overwrite on the whole list with the interval we fetched so when it comes to the next interval it won't find any intersection so it will set the resourceIntervals to an empty array. So here https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1851d3046682020686f517dec3c744d88a38b049/planning/static/src/views/planning_gantt/planning_gantt_renderer.js#L231-L234 it will mess up the percentage calculation which will lead to wrong allocated hours numbers.

## Fix:
Instead of overwriting on resourceIntervals we push to it the intervals returned to keep the intervals for each resource.

opw-6316368

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123750

This is one of many errors fixing the FAIA report, which is the SAF-T report for Luxembourg. See PR #113316 for a list of similar PRs.

### Error 1: Negative tax amounts

Auditors from Luxemborg provided one Odoo user with analysis files of their FAIA xml report. The following discrepancy was present in more than 300 lines:

`[TaxInformation/TaxAmount/Amount] # is negative. Only postive values are admitted. The sign is automatically determined by the corresponding CreditAmount (-) Or DebitAmount (+) on the same Line.`

This discrepancy was caused by two different scenarios. The first was a negative `unit_price` line, such as a Discount product. The second was a tax with negative and positive repartition lines, such as a tax with xml ID `lu_2015_tax_AP-EC-17`.

Luxembourg officials confirmed the following behavior:
1. The TaxInformation/TaxAmount/Amount element must be positive.
2. The TaxInformationTotals/TaxAmount/Amount element may be negative.
3. There may only be one TaxInformationTotals element per TaxCode in an Invoice element.

This commit ensures that these conditions are met for the FAIA report. I'm not sure if the TaxInformation changes should also be applied to the base `account_saft saft_report.xml` file.

### Error 2: SoftwareVersion

The SoftwareVersion element is limited to 18 characters. The relevant error from a customer's analysis file is below.

Error:  Value exceeds maxLength of "18".

### Error 3: CurrencyAmount

The `account_saft` method `GeneralLedgerCustomHandler._saft_fill_report_tax_details_values()` does not report the amount of tax in foreign currency, instead replacing this value with the amount in company currency. No errors prompted this change; it just seems wrong on its face.

### Error 4: 
PR #113720 ensured that the TaxType element is always TVA. This means that the TaxType should no longer should be ignored in our example documents.

### Error 5: Schema validation failure

The elements Inovice/CustomerInfo and Invoice/SupplierInfo are defined with the element `<xs:choice>` in the XSD file linked below. Only one can be present at any time, not both.

https://pfi.public.lu/dam-assets/backup/FAIA/FAIA/XSD_Files.zip. note: currently the link is broken.

PR #100749 allowed many parts of SAF-T code to display both customer and supplier data, including these elements. This commit ensures that the elements are mutually exclusive.

opw-6344914 [Link](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/6344914)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129043
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126121

### Steps to reproduce:

- In the settings enable Multi-Steps Routes
- Put your warehouse in manufacture in 3 steps
- Create a storable product P
- Create and confirm an MO for 1 unit of P
- Go to Inventory > Operations > Procurement > Replenishment
- Create a new one for P in WH/stock
#### > The forecasted quantity in stock is still 0 but should be at 1

### Cause of the issue:

This is the exact use case already fixed in
85dd3369ed17b98b2ce485be04f140cf4cfa8aa3, which stamped the finished move with a `location_final_id` pointing at WH/Stock so that the move contributes to the forecast there even though its `location_dest_id` is the intermediate WH/Post-Production.

That fix was reverted in practice by 42275f83dc5350822a625e19d65148e8b41ab1d4, which replaced the value with `mo.location_dest_id`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/mrp/models/stock_move.py#L466-L467

Its reasoning was that in a single-warehouse setup `location_dest_id` equals the warehouse stock location, so the behaviour would be unchanged. That holds in 1 and 2 steps, where the extra step is on the component side and only moves `default_location_src_id` to the pre-production location. It breaks in 3 steps, the only mode that also moves `default_location_dest_id`, to the post-production location: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/mrp/models/stock_warehouse.py#L246-L247 and `_compute_locations` propagates it to the MO:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L334-L341

WH/Post-Production is a sibling of WH/Stock under the warehouse view location, not a child of it. Since `location_final_id` takes precedence over `location_dest_id` for the non-done part of the move chain:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/stock/models/product.py#L331-L334 the finished move stopped being counted in the WH/Stock forecast.

Why the test did not catch it:

`test_3_steps_manufacturing_forecast` stayed green through the whole regression, because it scoped `virtual_available` with a `location_id` context key. `_get_domain_locations` only reads `location` and `warehouse_id`; `location_id` is silently ignored: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/stock/models/product.py#L284-L287 The call therefore fell through to the branch scoping the forecast to every warehouse view location:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/stock/models/product.py#L303-L309 and the warehouse view location is the common parent of both WH/Stock and WH/Post-Production. The assertion held regardless of where `location_final_id` pointed, so the test was a false positive from the start: it also passes with 85dd3369ed17b98b2ce485be04f140cf4cfa8aa3 fully reverted. Using the `location` key makes it fail without the fix and pass with it.

### Fix:

Neither fix proposition was right on its own; each one was correct only in its own scenario. The`mo.warehouse_id.lot_stock_id` resolves the warehouse from the components, so it points at the wrong warehouse as soon as the finished product is produced for another one. `mo.location_dest_id` is the post-production location as soon as the warehouse manufactures in 3 steps, so it drops the quantity from the forecast of the manufacturing warehouse itself.

What separates the two is not the warehouse but whether the destination is a transit step. In 3 steps the finished product only reaches the stock through the post-production push rule: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/mrp/models/stock_warehouse.py#L57 so the final location is the stock of the warehouse owning that destination. Any other destination is already final and is kept as is, which leaves cross-warehouse MOs and destinations set to a sub-location of the stock untouched.

The rule's destination is read rather than `warehouse.lot_stock_id` because a push move takes its destination from the rule and not from the operation type:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/stock/models/stock_rule.py#L256-L260
so the forecast stays correct when the store step is reconfigured to land somewhere else than the warehouse stock.

The rule is looked up on `pbm_route_id` by its `picking_type_id` instead of through `warehouse.sam_rule_id`, because that field is no longer set. It used to be an entry of `_generate_global_route_rules_values`, and it is that entry which made the generic warehouse machinery create the rule and store it back on the warehouse:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/stock/models/stock_warehouse.py#L403-L410
11e69870db1c49d9a6af79ffd263e4e162b34b6b removed it when the post-production step stopped being a pull rule on the Manufacture route and became a push rule generated from `get_rules_dict`. Only the field declaration was left behind, and nothing writes it any more:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/6a56908e5febfdb4e6e0eacfb8655b092319819f/addons/mrp/models/stock_warehouse.py#L21-L22
so reading it would silently give an empty recordset. The lookup is not delegated to `_get_push_rule` to avoid a search per finished move.

opw-4882390

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#285185
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#283234

Changing a project's visibility fails when its documents folder contains a shortcut.
The visibility change is never applied and the following error is raised:
"You can not update the access of a shortcut, update its target instead."

### Reproduction steps

- Create a project and add a document to its folder.
- Create another document outside the project's folder.
- Create a shortcut to that document in the project's folder.
- Change the project's visibility.

### Cause

Changing a project's visibility updates the access rights of its folder and documents together.

The shortcut access check is meant to reject operations performed only on shortcuts. However, reading `shortcut_document_id` on a recordset returns the shortcut targets found across that recordset. Therefore, the presence of a single shortcut makes the check reject the whole operation.

This prevents regular documents and the project folder from having their access updated.

### Fix

Only reject access updates when all records involved are shortcuts.

This preserves the protection against changing shortcut access directly while allowing project access updates to include shortcuts alongside regular documents and folders.

opw-6472637

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129588
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128756

# How to reproduce
- Activate the stock_landed_costs module
- Enable Dropshipping
- Create a product with :
	- Category :
		- Costing Method : AVCO
		- Inventory Valuation : Perpetual
	- Routes : Dropship
	- Atleast one vendor
- Create a SO for that product
- Confirm the SO & then Confirm the associated PO
- Login as an user with "User" rights for Inventory
- Try to validate the Dropship transfer

# The issue
You get an access error. If the same flow is done with a product with a Standard Price costing method, then the Dropship is properly validated

# Cause
When validating the Dropship, we'll call `_action_done` on the moves. This will trigger an update of the standard price of the product : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L177 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L345-L349

Since we're in avco, this will run the `_run_average_batch` method : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L675

That will fetch the value of each moves. For the Dropship moves, it'll do so by calling the `_get_value()` method :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/product.py#L486

This method will compute the value of the move, notably by using the associated landed costs : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L431 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_landed_costs/models/stock_move.py#L14

Now the issue is that this computation calls `_read_group` on 'stock.valuation.adjustment.lines' that are retricted to inventory administrators :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_landed_costs/models/stock_move.py#L11 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5f6fb63d5d7585805642c702d096b2f882e73761/addons/stock_landed_costs/security/ir.model.access.csv#L4

# Proposed solution
Get the value of the move in sudo like previously done in the flow : https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/60bc7ae38e335958589c172df88e059bf0738cac/addons/stock_account/models/stock_move.py#L314

opw-6323645

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284251
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273102

Steps to reproduce
==================
1. Configure a delivery method with free shipping above a threshold
2. Add a product to the cart above that threshold, select the delivery method and leave the cart unfinished
3. Lower the product price below the threshold
4. Recover the cart and confirm the order from /shop/checkout

=> The product prices are refreshed, but shipping stays free although
   the new total is below the threshold.

Root cause
==========
Since [1], nothing re-rates the carrier after /shop/confirm_order refreshes the cart prices: the delivery method is selected before the confirmation. In 17.0, the payment page auto-clicked the selected carrier on load, which re-rated the shipping cost and masked the issue.

Fix
===
Re-rate the selected delivery method in `shop_confirm_order` after the prices have been recomputed, as `_cart_update` already does.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8e2b6cede55b51f7ccdbe7601aa7e6035fd6f9fe

opw-6383849


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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284606
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276905

Steps to Reproduce :
1. Go to Website → Edit Mode
2. Add a snippet with button
3. Click on button and change its type to : " Custom"
4. Apply the gradient type color in fill color option
5. Apply any color in text color option
6. You will notice that the gradient type color in fill color option is
removed.

Problem:
Since [this commit][1] new button style options have been added to the
sidebar. If one changes the style of a button to custom, changes the
background to gradient, and tries to change the text color, the
background gradient is removed.

Cause:
Whenever a gradient is added either to text or as a background, it is
applied as a background image. In the case of a text gradient, an
additional class, `text-gradient`, is applied for correct styling. Once
a change to either color or background/fill is applied that is not a
gradient color change, the background image of the element would be
reset to nothing. This is the result of [this line][2] from a [previous
commit][3]. In the case of a button, this meant changing the font
color would reset the background. That is not the desired outcome.
The flaw was only discovered once new options were added to change
non-text/font elements' backgrounds to gradient.

Solution:
An additional check has been added to see if the element being edited
is text. If so, and it's a gradient style being changed, we remove the
background image. Otherwise it is kept so that the button case from
above is resolved.

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/2bf1db001b195480b963b338583c170aa1c009a3
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8e0845712f462ecfafd2176406dcbafc869a5564/addons/html_editor/static/src/main/font/color_plugin.js#L575
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8e0845712f462ecfafd2176406dcbafc869a5564

task-6247134

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#285063
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279070

When printing an invoice, a traceback will occur if the company's partner has an invalid CUIT.

Steps to reproduce the error:
- Install ``l10n_ar_edi`` module with demo data
- Switch to ``(AR) Exento`` Company
- Go to Invoicing > Configuration > Journals > Open ``Ventas Preimpreso`` journal >
  ARCA POS System: ``Electronic Invoice - Web Service`` > Save
- Create a new invoice with ``ADHOC SA`` partner > Confirm the invoice
- Open the ``(AR) Exento`` partner and set the VAT to ``BE0477472701``
- Open the Invoice > print

Traceback:
```py
ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: 'BE0477472701'
```

After this [commit], companies outside the EU can use European VAT numbers.
Consequently, an Argentine partner can have a CUIT number such as ``BE0477472701``,
which is valid as a Belgian VAT number but not as a CUIT.
When printing the invoice, the ``l10n_ar_vat`` field is computed
from the partner's VAT and its value is passed to ``int()``,
causing a traceback at the following line:
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d55486866d09f8aa87c2003dab722cfa323068b4/l10n_ar_edi/models/account_move.py#L138

[commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/a2afe3292e1cd0a4f339dc47707e469653d13ea0

Enterprise PR: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/127820

sentry-7666042143

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284880
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#282454

When printing an invoice, a traceback will occur if the company's partner has an invalid CUIT.

Steps to reproduce the error:
- Install ``l10n_ar_edi`` module with demo data
- Switch to ``(AR) Exento`` Company
- Go to Invoicing > Configuration > Journals > Open ``Ventas Preimpreso`` journal >
  ARCA POS System: ``Electronic Invoice - Web Service`` > Save
- Create a new invoice with ``ADHOC SA`` partner > Confirm the invoice
- Open the ``(AR) Exento`` partner and set the VAT to ``BE0477472701``
- Open the Invoice > print

Traceback:
```py
ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: 'BE0477472701'
```

The issue occurs because when the partner's identification type is CUIT,
At [1] ``_run_check_identification()`` method does not include partners whose identification type has ``is_vat=True``.
As a result, CUIT is not validated by ``_run_check_identification()`` method in ``l10n_ar`` module at [2].
So, partner's ``l10n_ar_vat`` field can be computed as ``BE0477472701``.
Passing this value to ``int()`` raises the traceback during invoice printing at below line.
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/d55486866d09f8aa87c2003dab722cfa323068b4/l10n_ar_edi/models/account_move.py#L138

[1]:https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c2a39085ba0fbcf8a0e6a55228191e764499caea/addons/l10n_latam_base/models/res_partner.py#L24-L30

[2]:https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/c2a39085ba0fbcf8a0e6a55228191e764499caea/addons/l10n_ar/models/res_partner.py#L55-L65

Community PR: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/282454

sentry-7666042143

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129449
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#127820

Steps to reproduce
---
1. Install sale_timesheet_enterprise.
2. Go to Timesheets > Configuration > Settings (as Admin).
3. Disable the "Billing Rate Indicators" setting and enable timesheet assistant.
4. Log in as a normal user with "Timesheets > Own timesheet" access.
5. Open the Timesheets app.

Issue
---
The "Configuration" menu is completely hidden. The regular user cannot access the "Assistant Rules" menu unless they turn on debug mode.

Cause
---
When the billing rates feature is turned off, the _load_menus_blacklist function hides the Enterprise Configuration menu. The logic used an and condition, meaning the menu was only kept visible if the user was an Assistant AND had Manager/Admin rights. This locked out standard users.

Fix
---
Change the blacklist condition. Allow the Enterprise Configuration menu to stay visible if the user needs it for the Assistant feature (when UoM is not Days), OR if the user is a Manager/Admin.

References to check other issues
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/120609
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/117984

task - 6470183

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128727
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128096

Steps to produce:
---
- Install website_sale module without demo.
- Create a new product and publish it.
- From the incognito, go to shop and add that product to cart.
- While doing checkout > fill the address form.
- Add the all details including the company name and valid VAT.
  (ex. BE0477472701)
- Submit the form.

Issue:
---
- When a public or guest user submits a new address with both a contact name
  and a company name along with a valid VAT number, the contact's name was
  being overwritten with the company name.

Root cause:
---
- The _compute_is_company heuristic in res.partner automatically sets
  is_company=True for partners with valid VAT. In [commit]
  `_create_or_update_address`, the condition `elif partner_sudo.is_company:`
  was designed to rename existing companies, but incorrectly caught newly
  created individuals marked as companies due to VAT, causing their name to be
  overwritten instead of creating a parent company.

Solution:
---
- Replaced the is_company check with explicit conditions: the partner
  has no parent_id, has contact-type child_ids.
- This ensures the rename-company branch only fires for actual company
  heads that the logged-in user belongs to, not for individuals that
  happen to have is_company=True due to a valid VAT.

[commit]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/8f3a32170c842f5f42edc79bf8620276f0da7be4

opw-6356772
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#285495
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#275044