Monday, September 14, 2026
15 changes · saas-19.1
Enhancements to existing features
External tax values are now applied more efficiently by skipping an unnecessary clearing step before replacing taxes. This improves processing time for invoices with many lines, especially when using external tax services such as AvaTax, while keeping the same results.
Original PR description
[PERF] account_external_tax: avoid redundant tax clearing Avoid unnecessarily clearing `tax_ids` before setting the externally computed taxes, as the field is immediately replaced with the new tax…
[PERF] account_external_tax: avoid redundant tax clearing Avoid unnecessarily clearing `tax_ids` before setting the externally computed taxes, as the field is immediately replaced with the new tax values. Performance testing was performed using an invoice containing 200 lines with externally computed AvaTax taxes. Performance testing: | Metric | Before | After | |--------------------------------|--------|---------| | `_set_external_taxes()` | ~1:13 | ~43.77s | | Total external tax calculation | ~1:16 | ~46.66s | This reduces the execution time of `_set_external_taxes()` by approximately 40% for a 200-line invoice, while preserving the existing functional flow. The optimization is not specific to AvaTax and benefits the common `account.external.tax.mixin` flow when setting externally computed taxes on multiple lines. Profiler comparison: Before: <img width="1548" height="442" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a5f2553c-a926-4324-88b2-743ed9214bf5" /> After: <img width="1429" height="440" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c9c9c673-4654-4e11-b5f2-ffa4ecc87038" /> **opw-6472692** Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#130982
Resolved issues and error corrections
Fixed an issue that could stop users from creating rental orders when an optional rental product was added after the website rental feature was removed. Rental dates are now handled correctly during price calculation, so sales teams can add these products without encountering an error.
Original PR description
Problem: When the website_sale_renting module is uninstalled and you try to create a rental order with a product that has an optional rental product, the system crashes with a traceback. This happens…
Problem: When the website_sale_renting module is uninstalled and you try to create a rental order with a product that has an optional rental product, the system crashes with a traceback. This happens because the rental start and end dates are passed to the product pricing calculations as plain text strings instead of proper date formats, which breaks the timezone math. Solution: This commit ensures that the rental start and end dates are converted into proper datetime formats before any duration or pricing calculations occur, preventing the error and allowing the products to be added to the rental order smoothly. Steps to reproduce(runbot v18): 1. Install the Rental (sale_renting) and Website modules. 2. Uninstall the website_sale_renting module. 3. Create a rental product and configure another rental product as its optional product. 4. Open the Rental application and try to add the created product to a rental order. 5. A traceback is raised while calculating the rental price. opw-6485776 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#130071 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128668
This fix ensures the Peru localization uses the same daily exchange rate expected by SUNAT. It prevents mismatched rates in electronic tax reporting, reducing the risk of validation issues for Peruvian companies.
Original PR description
In this commit https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/231948 the base functionality of exchange rate fetching was changed in order to have a consistent exchange rate value per day. The problem is that in l10n_pe, SUNAT already does this, setting each day's official exchange rate to be the closing rate of the previous day. Because SUNAT expects the exchange rate being sent to it to be the same as the one generated in the morning, the new logic is defaulting to a mismatched rate instead. This commit overrides the `_get_currency_rates` method with the only change being an inclusive `<=` search instead of the strictly `<`. opw-6468065 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr
This fix ensures Mexican electronic payment documents calculate fixed-rate taxes correctly when an invoice is partially paid. It helps prevent tax authority or certification provider rejections caused by mismatched tax base and tax amount values.
Original PR description
When generating a payment complement, tax base and importe coming from the related invoice are prorated by the percentage actually paid, each rounded independently to the currency precision. The…
When generating a payment complement, tax base and importe coming from the related invoice are prorated by the percentage actually paid, each rounded independently to the currency precision. The post-fix step that restores the SAT invariant uses a Tasa-only formula (`base = total / (1 + rate)`), so Cuota (fixed amount per unit) taxes keep mismatched values, ending up with `ImporteDR != round(BaseDR * TasaOCuotaDR)`. This leads to CFDIs rejected by the PAC/SAT. Steps to reproduce: - Create a customer invoice with a Cuota IEPS tax (e.g. 26.2569). - Register a partial payment whose amount is not an exact divisor of the invoice total (e.g. one third). - Send the payment CFDI: the resulting Cuota TrasladoDR has an ImporteDR that does not match BaseDR * TasaOCuotaDR, leading to a rejected CFDI. This commit recomputes `importe` from the prorated `base` for Cuota taxes (bypassing the Tasa post-fix) opw-6087564 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#130380 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113395
This fix ensures that when a past point-of-sale order is later invoiced, the data sent to Spain's AEAT tax authority cancels only the original simplified receipt, not the newly created full invoice. This prevents incorrect tax reporting and reduces the risk of accounting discrepancies for Spanish POS operations.
Original PR description
When creating an invoice for a previous POS order, the data sent to AEAT cancels the full invoice instead of the order's simplified invoice. Steps to reproduce: - Open a POS and make a sale without invoicing it; - In the POS, go to the Order tab; - Select the order and fully invoice it. Issue: The AEAT cancellation line added to the pos order actually cancels the full invoice just created [opw-6471927](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6471927) --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284277
Restaurant point-of-sale orders are now saved when the bill is printed. This helps prevent order details from being lost if the system reloads or data is refreshed after printing.
Original PR description
We now sync the order when printing bill, to avoid loosing it in case of reload data. task-6527207 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286157
This fixes Taiwan B2B e-invoices sent through ECPay so down payment deductions no longer cause tax rounding discrepancies or rejected submissions. The e-invoice now reports the same tax amounts as the posted invoice, improving reliability and consistency for Taiwan invoicing.
Original PR description
Current behavior: -- Sending a B2B invoice that deducts a down payment is rejected by ECPay with "(item tax discrepancy exceeds 1 NT$)", so the invoice cannot be issued at all. When it is accepted,…
Current behavior: -- Sending a B2B invoice that deducts a down payment is rejected by ECPay with "(item tax discrepancy exceeds 1 NT$)", so the invoice cannot be issued at all. When it is accepted, the tax on the e-invoice can still differ from the tax the invoice books. Expected behavior: -- The invoice is accepted, and the tax reported on the e-invoice is the one the invoice booked. Steps to reproduce: -- - Set a company up in Taiwan (TWD) with the ECPay credentials filled in - Create a sale order of 190,630 for a customer with a VAT number - Invoice a 50% down payment through the down payment wizard, then a 30% one, and post both - Invoice the remainder and post it - Send the final invoice to ECPay Cause of the issue: -- _l10n_tw_edi_prepare_item_list rebuilt the tax from the raw amount of every line and rounded that total once. Both steps also disagree with the invoice. Negative lines resulting from downpayments seem to be more strictly checked on ECPay and taxes cannot be re-derived easily by ECPay's system. There is a also a relevant but slightly different issue where the invoice amount is calculated differently but the ECPay page will show a different value. e.g. the invoice rounds each computation key on its own: 50.00 - 16.50 = 33.50 rounds to 34 where the invoice books 50 - 17 = 33. No issue was detected for purely positive lines (a transaction with different products but no downpayment) Fix: -- Use the tax amount the line carries when it has one, and fall back to the raw amount otherwise, so the payload reports what the invoice booked. Send the tax of each line in the ItemTax field. Let ECPay derive its own per-item tax and checks it against the declared total for purely positive lines, and recalculate them for negative so the rounding difference between them is spread one unit at a time across the lines, the way ECPay distributes it. opw-6424237 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281928
This fixes an issue in the HTML editor where copying and pasting list items with nested bullets could include extra content or lose the outer list structure. Users can now copy complex list content more predictably, preserving the intended formatting.
Original PR description
Problem: Copying content from a list item containing a nested list can either include the unselected nested list or lose part of the copied content. Solution: - Detect whether the whole `<li>` was selected before copying the full list item with its nested lists. - When only part of the list item is selected, copy only the selected content and rebuild the required `<li>` wrapper. - Apply this logic only to list items with multiple top-level children. Steps to reproduce: - Add bullet list with nested list. - CTRL+A - Press Enter twice to create new paragraph. - Paste. - Observe the outer list is lost. task-6438347 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#281205
Fixes an inventory issue where products packed in separate packages could appear under the same package during the final delivery step. This helps warehouse teams keep package tracking accurate when deliveries are split and later merged.
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce --- 1. Set the warehouse to deliver in 3 steps. 2. Create a delivery pick not tied to a procurement group (not from a sale order) with a consumable product, and validate it. 3. On…
Steps to reproduce --- 1. Set the warehouse to deliver in 3 steps. 2. Create a delivery pick not tied to a procurement group (not from a sale order) with a consumable product, and validate it. 3. On the pack transfer, put the goods in a package and validate. 4. Duplicate the pick, validate it, put its goods in a second package on the pack transfer, and validate. 5. Open the final delivery: both lines sit in the same package instead of one line per package. Issue --- The two picks share no procurement group, so their delivery moves merge onto a single move keyed by partner. Validating the second pack tops up that already partially reserved move: for a consumable, `_action_assign` builds its lines from `_get_available_move_lines`, which reports the availability of every upstream package without discounting what the move already reserved. https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/05af9e6877fd0f044bb46c983fe7300eb1db9307/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1907-L1909 The package already reserved on the first line is therefore offered again and reused, collapsing both lines onto one package. The reserved-product branch below already subtracts the move's own reservation before allocating; doing the same here leaves each package on its own line. opw-6498532 --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287820 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#284956
Fixed an issue where one unschedulable task could incorrectly consume shared assignee availability and push later related tasks far into the future. Project schedules now evaluate each task separately, helping dependent tasks land in the next realistic available slot.
Original PR description
Steps to reproduce: 1. create three tasks A,B & C with the same assignee 2. make tasks B and C depend on A and start on the `date_deadline` of task A 3. set the duration of task B (processed before C) to be longer than the 53-week search window 4. reschedule task A to end after task C starts Problem: A candidate that couldn't be scheduled was putting its assignee in conflict, subtracting the inspected availability while failing from the shared pool. Consequently, every later candidate sharing that assignee got force-placed into the same forward reschedule fallback that lands near the tail of the 53-week search window instead of the next available slot. Solution: Each candidate should be evaluated on its own ability to fit, and the time it occupies should count against the shared pool. opw-6380163 --- Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#130922 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129326
PINT electronic invoices are now generated through the newer UBL export flow instead of the older BIS 2.0 process. This helps keep invoice exchange aligned with current standards and supports the gradual retirement of legacy export logic.
Original PR description
Problem --------- Currently, PINT uses the old BIS2.0 export. Objective --------- Decouple the exports as an effort to remove the old BIS implementation. no-task --- I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287793 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#283585
Time slots that have reached capacity are no longer hidden in Point of Sale and Self Order screens. Customers and staff can still see unavailable slots, making availability clearer and reducing confusion during ordering.
Original PR description
Before this commit: = * Slots that reached their maximum capacity for a given time frame were `hidden` from the `pos_self_order` & `point_of_sale` slot selection dialog. After this commit: = * Slots remain visible but are `disabled` when they reach their maximum capacity in `pos_self_order` & slot remains visible with a `red background` in the `point_of_sale` slot selection dialog. task-6340956 Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#286467
Mexican electronic payment complements now report tax amounts using the decimal precision required for the payment currency. This prevents PAC rejections from Quadrum and improves successful submission of compliant payment documents, including mixed-currency cases.
Original PR description
The 'ImpuestosP' node of the payment complement (Pagos 2.0) is reported with 6 decimals while the SAT expects the amounts to be expressed with the number of decimals supported by the currency of the…
The 'ImpuestosP' node of the payment complement (Pagos 2.0) is reported with 6 decimals while the SAT expects the amounts to be expressed with the number of decimals supported by the currency of the payment ('MonedaP'), as published in the 'c_Moneda' catalog, for example 2 decimals for MXN.
Steps to reproduce:
- Have an MX Company setup with Quadrum as PAC.
- Create and sign a customer invoice in MXN with a 16% IVA tax.
- Register a full payment and send the payment complement to the PAC.
Issue:
Payment will be rejected
```
Code : CRPER654
Message : El importe del campo BaseP que corresponde a Traslado, no tiene la cantidad de decimales que soporta la moneda (MonedaP)
```
Analysis:
Quadrum recently aligned its validation on that rule and now rejects the document having fields with too much decimals and, currently, fields like BaseP, ImporteP are pinned to 6 decimals in the template.
Reporting them with the decimals of the payment currency is not enough when the payment settles a document expressed in another currency: those amounts are also compared with the ones of the related documents converted with 'EquivalenciaDR', and the PAC expects the values truncated or rounded
```
Code : CRP20274
Extra Info : Traslados: La sumatoria de ImporteDR es mayor al ImporteP 1.30.
Valores minimos permitidos: Truncado: 1.29 o redondeado: 1.3
```
opw-6561617
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#131319
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#131267Portal users can now submit product reviews with attached files without hitting a generic Not Found error. This ensures the product review feature works consistently when discussion and ratings are enabled on a website.
Original PR description
A portal user cannot add an attachment when posting a review on a product page: submitting the review with a file attached fails with a generic "Not Found" error, while posting the exact same review…
A portal user cannot add an attachment when posting a review on a product page: submitting the review with a file attached fails with a generic "Not Found" error, while posting the exact same review without an attachment works fine.
Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
* Enable "Discussion and Rating" on a product page (Website > Customize)
* Log in as a portal user and open that product page
* Write a review, attach a file, then submit
> Observation:
"Not Found
The requested URL was not found on the server. If you entered the URL manually please check your spelling and try again."
Why the fix:
------------
`product.template._get_mail_message_access()` demotes a portal user's create access to 'write' whenever
`env['website'].is_view_active('website_sale.product_comment')` is False, since 'write' access is a deliberate way to block posting when the feature is toggled off for the website. `is_view_active` only picks the correct, website-specific view when `website_id` is present in `self.env.context`; that key is injected by the website frontend only for routes declared `website=True`.
`/mail/attachment/upload` is not `website=True` (attachments used to go through the dedicated, `website=True` `/portal/attachment/add` route, removed when portal's attachment uploader was unified with mail's), so `website_id` is missing from context on that route, `is_view_active` falls back to the generic, shipped-`active="False"` view, and always reports the feature as disabled - even when it is actually enabled for the current website. Create access is then wrongly demoted to 'write', which a portal user never has on `product.template`, so the thread lookup fails and the controller raises `NotFound()`.
Resolve the current website from the request itself (`env['website'].get_current_website()`) and inject its id into context before checking `is_view_active`, instead of relying on `website_id` already being in context. This makes the check accurate regardless of which route triggered it.
opw-6539184
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287674
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#287345Fixed an issue where opening the Project task Pivot view from a saved favorite filter could fail. Users can now analyze their tasks in Pivot view reliably, including when personal task stages are involved.
Original PR description
Since the introduction of `read_grouping_sets` for Pivot views, opening the Pivot view from a saved favorite filter can crash. ### **Steps to reproduce:** - Install Project. - Open My Tasks. - Save…
Since the introduction of `read_grouping_sets` for Pivot views, opening the Pivot view from a saved favorite filter can crash. ### **Steps to reproduce:** - Install Project. - Open My Tasks. - Save the current filter as a favorite. - Switch to the Pivot view. ### **Error:** ``` ValueError: Cannot convert project.task.personal_stage_id to SQL because it is not stored. ``` ### **Root Cause:** Since [commit](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/194413/changes/166a546ec52784c413f5b5d7d29af89d618d6519), Pivot views use `_read_grouping_sets` instead of `_read_group`. `project.task` only remaps `personal_stage_type_id` to the stored `personal_stage_type_ids` in [_read_group](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5f6fb63d5d7585805642c702d096b2f882e73761/addons/project/models/project_task.py#L2169-L2179), so the remapping is bypassed for Pivot views. The ORM then attempts to group by the non-stored `personal_stage_type_id` relation, leading to the SQL conversion error. ### **Fix:** Mirror the remapping logic in `_read_grouping_sets` so Pivot views use `personal_stage_type_ids` before the ORM generates the SQL query. **opw-6306389** Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272985