Steps to reproduce:
- Create a company contact with a delivery address that has no name
- Make a PoS order for the delivery address and pay it
- Open the PoS, open the customer list, and click "Orders" on the company

Issue:
The screen goes blank.

Cause:
The ticket screen is opened with the company name as search term. The server domain searches on `partner_id.complete_name`, so the orders of the address contact are returned too. They are then fuzzy matched on `getPartnerName()`, which returns `false` for a partner without a name, and `fuzzyLookup` calls a string method on it. The error is raised during rendering, so the whole app is destroyed.

Fix:
Make `getPartnerName()` always return a string, and fall back on the parent name, like the complete name does. This way the orders of the address contact are still listed when searching on the company name, instead of being filtered out by an empty name.

opw-6578541

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#288880

### Contains the following commits:

https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/3e0951a53b [REL] 19.2.30 [Task: 0](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/0)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/d499bd8bcd [IMP] demo: debounce xml template build [Task: 6574005](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6574005)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/acf1b01cd8 [FIX] demo: fix scorecard demo definition [Task: 6573109](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6573109)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/38daa1408d [FIX] pivot: wrong running total with collapsed/hidden dimensions [Task: 6569607](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6569607)
https://github.com/odoo/o-spreadsheet/commit/2539ffbdb2 [FIX] pivot: fix scope of `pivot_html_renderer` css [Task: 6523521](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/2328/tasks/6523521)

Co-authored-by: Florian Damhaut (flda) <flda@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Hendrickx (anhe) <anhe@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexis Lacroix (laa) <laa@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Lefèvre (lul) <lul@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Adrien Minne (adrm) <adrm@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Ronak Mukeshbhai Bharadiya (rmbh) <rmbh@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Dhrutik Patel (dhrp) <dhrp@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Rémi Rahir (rar) <rar@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Pierre Rousseau (pro) <pro@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Vincent Schippefilt (vsc) <vsc@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Marceline Thomas (matho) <matho@odoo.com>

### Steps to reproduce:

- Install `l10n_tr_nilvera_edispatch` (e.g. the `tr` country build)
- Run `test_basic_stock_flow_with_minimal_access_rights`
> The tour times out on step 6/31, "check that at least one picking is present in the view".

### Cause of the issue:

The step triggers on `.o_stock_list_view_view`, a class the web client derives from the `js_class` of `stock.vpicktree`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71c040ae236c9487afc49559486a588f21ccb37b/addons/stock/views/stock_picking_views.xml#L66-L70
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71c040ae236c9487afc49559486a588f21ccb37b/addons/web/static/src/views/utils.js#L45-L68 `l10n_tr_nilvera_edispatch` overwrites that attribute to plug in its e-Receipt upload button, so the root carries
`o_l10n_tr_edispatch_tree_view` instead and the trigger never matches: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/71c040ae236c9487afc49559486a588f21ccb37b/addons/l10n_tr_nilvera_edispatch/views/stock_picking_views.xml#L4-L13 
Only the class name changes: `L10nTrNilveraEdispatchListView` spreads `StockListView`, so the rendered list is identical.

runbot-947260

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#288255

Steps to reproduce:
----------------------------------------
1. Install the Expense module.
2. Create an expense with a receipt/attachment and approve it.
3. Try to split the approved expense using the "Split Expense" button.

Observation:
----------------------------------------
An Access Error is raised: "You can't add attachments to an expense once it has been approved."

Issue:
----------------------------------------
When splitting an approved expense, Odoo duplicates the original expense into multiple split parts. Since the original expense is already in the `approved` state, the newly created duplicate records also have `state == 'approved'`. During the split process, Odoo copies the attachments from the original expense to the newly created split records:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e696bc516c97bc7157d52c5dba0b42e7cb8bab48/addons/hr_expense/wizard/hr_expense_split_wizard.py#L59-L61

Because `copied_expense.state` is 'approved', the create method of `ir.attachment` triggers an AccessError via the security validation https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/e696bc516c97bc7157d52c5dba0b42e7cb8bab48/addons/hr_expense/models/ir_attachment.py#L23-L27

Solution:
----------------------------------------
Bypass the attachment restriction if the creation is initiated from the split wizard. It only bypasses the validation during the split operation, preserving the security constraints for normal user uploads to approved expenses

opw-6373579

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276139

…heet history

Some spreadsheet can end up in a corrupted history state

Original Data ⮕ no revision (XX) ⮕ Snapshot ⮕ Active Revisions and where the original data differ from the snapshot.

XX: can occur after the script added https://github.com/odoo/upgrade/issues/6340. The migration script is supposed to rewrite the history of the spreadsheet when there are holes in the archived revisions continuity (eg. the history was original Data ⮕ rev **A** ⮕ rev **B** ⮕ rev **C** ⮕ snapshot ⮕ rev **D** and user deleted rev **B** for instance, the script deletes **A** and **C** and marks **D** as the very first revision).

Version history was designed with the idea to replay every single revision that existed since the creation of the spreadsheet and apply it to the original data, and in case of missing revisions, in our example, B is missing, we detect the lack of continuity, we start from the snapshot, and replay every single revision since that snapshot.

When the migration fixes the continuity, by deleting all the old revisions, and changing their order, we can no longer detect the lack of continuity and end up replay every available revision to the original data ,even though they are based on the snapshot.

In that scenario, since the revisions will be applied on the original data but since they are based on the state of the snapshot only, the final state of the spreadsheet will be corrupted since a part of the . If a user then decides to restore the spreadsheet to the version they see in the version history (which is corrupted as mentioned) and the last snapshot is overwritten with the corrupted state, effectively breaking the spreadsheet.

With this revision, we add a detection of this corrupted history state, in which case we enforce the history to be replayed from the snapshot and not the original data.

Task-6533708

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#131803
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#130649

## [FIX] l10n_co_reports: fix UNION ALL crash with multiple column groups

### Issue:
Any comparison mode (Period, Analytic, etc.) in the Libro Diario raises an Odoo Server Error

### Cause:
Each sub-query in the `UNION ALL` had its own `ORDER BY` SQL only allows one global `ORDER BY` on a `UNION ALL`, or parentheses around each query — neither was the case

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_co_reports` and `accountant`
- Enable Developer Mode in Settings
- Open the Libro Diario report and click the gear icon (top right)
- In the Options tab, enable Period Comparison
- Enable the Comparison for the Previous Period

Before the fix, an error is raised

------------------------------

## [FIX] l10n_co_reports: include partnerless entries in Libro Diario

### Issue:
Journal entries without a partner are excluded from the report but are legally required to appear

### Cause:
`_get_domain` called `super()` which adds `('partner_id', '!=', False)` to the domain, filtering out all partnerless entries
The SQL query also used a `JOIN` instead of `LEFT JOIN` on `res_partner`, excluding lines with no partner at the DB level

### Notes:
`NULL` values for `partner_name` or `line_label` caused the JS to hide the corresponding column headers
`header.js` matches columns to their header by `column_group_index`/`expression_label` and skips `None` values
Fixed by using `COALESCE` to return an empty string instead

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_co_reports` and `accountant`
- Create a Journal Entry without a partner or label
- Open the Daily Journal Report

Before the fix, the entry doesn't appear
After the fix, check that PARTNER and LABEL headers are visible

opw-6430728

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#131824
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#129674

In Ecuador, a company and its branches file under a single RUC, so the
ATS is expected to consolidate all of them. However, currently the
system exports only the active company report.

Steps to reproduce:

- Install the Ecuadorian localization
- Create a parent company and a branch, assign the RUC of the parent to
  the branch, and set the legal name of the branch in Settings
- Post a customer invoice with taxes in the parent (e.g. 750) and
  another one in the branch (e.g. 250)
- Activate both companies in the company selector
- Go to Accounting > Reporting > Tax return
- Select "Report: 104 (EC)", the dashboard shows the consolidated values
- Click on the gear icon next to "Tax Return" and select ATS

Issue:

The exported XML only contains the documents and the totals of the
parent company (750). The branch (250) is omitted.

Analysis:

Currently the ATS export use self.env.company for all searches, which
only retrieve the data of the first company set

opw-6469807

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128430

### Problem

`l10n_ar_edi` reports WSFEX / WSBFE line quantities (`Pro_qty`) truncated to 2 decimals in 19.0, no matter what precision the database has configured.

`_get_line_details()` reads the precision like this:

```python
uom_precision_digits = min(self.env['decimal.precision'].precision_get('Product Unit of Measure'), 2)
```

In 19.0 that `decimal.precision` record was renamed to **`Product Unit`** (`uom/data/uom_data.xml`, `decimal_product_uom`), so the lookup matches no record. `precision_get` does not raise in that case, it falls back to a default of 2 (`base/models/decimal_precision.py`: `return res[0] if res else 2`), so `min(2, 2) = 2`.

The rename was applied everywhere else — `account.move.line.quantity` already declares `digits='Product Unit'`. Only this lookup kept the old name.

### Impact

A quantity of `0.042` is sent as `0.04`. ARCA rejects the invoice with **error 1815** (item math inconsistency: `unit price x quantity - discount` no longer matches the item total), which blocks export invoicing completely.

It only shows up after upgrading to 19.0: on 18.0 the record still had the old name, so the lookup worked and the configured precision was used.

On our hosted fleet we identified **67 Argentinian databases** that use WSFEX or WSBFE and have a unit precision above 2. Eight of them already run 19.0 and are affected today; the rest will hit the same rejection as they upgrade.

### Fix

Use the current record name, and raise the cap to **6**, the maximum `Pro_qty` accepts according to the WSFEX developer manual ([V3.1.1](https://www.afip.gob.ar/ws/documentacion/manuales/WSFEX-Manualparaeldesarrollador_V3.1.1_ARCA.pdf), p. 15).

### Test plan

`l10n_ar_edi/tests/test_fex.py` adds `test_ar_edi_wsfex_pro_qty_decimal_precision`, covering three cases:

| `Product Unit` | quantity | expected `Pro_qty` |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 0.042 | `0.042` |
| 2 | 0.042 | `0.04` |
| 8 | 0.1234567 | `0.123457` (capped at 6) |

It does not go through the ARCA mock: it calls `_get_rounded_base_and_tax_lines()` and `_get_line_details()` directly.

### Note

Supersedes #130582 by the same author, which carried the same one-line fix without a test. Please review this one instead.

### Left out on purpose

`price_precision_digits` in the same method caps the unit price at 3 digits, which does not come from the specification either. That lookup still uses a record name that exists (`Product Price`), so there is no regression, and we have no rejection reported because of it. Changing it would widen the scope of a fix that has a concrete incident behind it, so it is left untouched here.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#131457

### Issue:
On iPhone and iPad (reduced window), the scrollbar is hidden behind the report on long scrollable pages
This affects all browsers on iOS and iPadOS — Apple forces the use of WebKit (its rendering engine) on all of them, including Chrome and Firefox

### Steps to reproduce (on iPhone):
- Install `l10n_es` (contains scrollable reports by default)
- Switch to the ES company
- Open the Tax Report and try to scroll
 
Before the fix, the scrollbar renders behind the report content

### Cause:
`o_content` was added unconditionally in commit https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/d60ea6e0f3245e394fd0cee5f22f52aff2a79e2e
But its role differs between desktop and mobile, and its presence on mobile triggers a WebKit compositor bug

On desktop, `o_content` is required:
`.o_action` stays `overflow: hidden`, so only `.o_content` (`overflow: auto`) can scroll the report
Per the CSS flexbox spec, a flex item won't shrink below its content size unless its `overflow` is not `visible`
Without `o_content`, the div keeps `overflow: visible`, refuses to shrink, overflows `.o_action`, and the excess is silently clipped — content becomes unreachable, not just visually different

On mobile, the framework flips scroll responsibility to `.o_action` (`overflow: auto`) and forces `.o_content` back to `overflow: initial`
`o_content` is therefore not needed on mobile

On WebKit (iOS/iPadOS), keeping `o_content` on mobile is harmful: it sits as a non-scrolling `position: relative` node between the real scroll ancestor (`.o_action`) and descendants that require special compositing — the sticky `thead` and the fixed-position mobile chatter
This configuration causes WebKit's compositor to miscalculate the Root layer bounding box
This geometry mismatch is the most likely explanation for why the native scroll indicator renders behind the report instead of on top of it
Removing `o_content` on mobile avoids this node entirely and restores correct compositor geometry

### Notes:
Tested on Android (Blink) with and without `o_content`: no visual difference and identical compositor layer geometry confirmed via Chrome DevTools — no regression introduced

The `padding-bottom` on `.o_account_report_scroll_container` is unrelated — it is applied unconditionally and exists for a separate bug (last row clipped on scroll)

opw-6191827

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#128528

1. Install Field Service and create a quotation with a service generating hours to plan, then confirm it
2. Click on the "To Plan" smart button and plan the hours
3. Open the planned shift and assign a second resource to it
4. Change the "Project" of the shift several times -> the "Allocated Time" changes at every attempt

The break time of a shift is the one of a single resource, while its allocated hours are the sum of the hours of all its resources. Both are mixed together when computing the break time and the allocated percentage, so as soon as a shift covers time outside of the schedule of its resources, the allocated percentage no longer matches the allocated hours it was computed from. As these two fields depend on each other, every recomputation then moves the allocated hours a bit further.

With this commit, the allocated hours are divided by the number of assigned resources wherever they are compared to the break time, which keeps them stable whatever the number of resources.

Task-6511322