feat(web-api): Add support for admin.users.getExpiration

[misscoded]

Summary

Adds support for admin.users.getExpiration (and updates generated responses). See documentation.

Resolves #2420.

Requirements (place an x in each [ ])

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.10%. Comparing base (a1112e3) to head (365579b).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2451   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.09%   93.10%           
=======================================
  Files          40       40           
  Lines       11240    11250   +10     
  Branches      713      713           
=======================================
+ Hits        10464    10474   +10     
  Misses        764      764           
  Partials       12       12           

Flag	Coverage Δ
cli-hooks	95.23% <ø> (ø)
cli-test	94.79% <ø> (ø)
oauth	77.39% <ø> (ø)
socket-mode	61.87% <ø> (ø)
web-api	98.11% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
webhook	96.66% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[zimeg]

@misscoded LGTM and thanks so much for including the generated responses with this change 🙏 ✨

I left a comment about one of those changes, but no blockers for this method 🤖

[zimeg]

🪓 issue(non-blocking): This should be included in the Java generated logs but I'm finding tests aren't covering this for me. Let's keep note to follow up on this - I think using generated types is correct while "message" is optional.

👁️‍🗨️ ramble: But I wouldn't be opposed to reverting changes of this file if that seems uncertain?

[misscoded]

@zimeg Why would this suddenly go missing?

[zimeg]

@misscoded Agh I missed this - apologies for slow response! But I think some of those arguments were added manually for a release before the Java SDK had matching attributes.

[misscoded]

Ah, ok! We historically have opted not to do that (for this exact reason 😄), and just use the generic Web API response type until it's updated, then swap them out. Have we changed the approach to this then, or was this a one-off? Because if types that are available for folks to use change and go missing, that's technically a breaking change.

[WilliamBergamin]

To prevent breaking changes should we simply leave those in for now?