chore: add guard tests for billing

[hj24]

Important

1. Make sure you have read our contribution guidelines
2. Ensure there is an associated issue and you have been assigned to it
3. Use the correct syntax to link this PR: Fixes #<issue number>.

Summary

Screenshots

Before	After
...	...

Checklist

• This change requires a documentation update, included: Dify Document
• I understand that this PR may be closed in case there was no previous discussion or issues. (This doesn't apply to typos!)
• I've added a test for each change that was introduced, and I tried as much as possible to make a single atomic change.
• I've updated the documentation accordingly.
• I ran make lint and make type-check (backend) and cd web && npx lint-staged (frontend) to appease the lint gods

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a compatibility issue in the billing service where new billing versions may return timestamp data as strings instead of integers. The changes ensure that the service can handle both formats by converting string timestamps to integers and maintaining a non-strict validation mode. A new unit test has been added to verify this conversion.

Highlights

• Billing Plan Compatibility: Ensures that the billing service can handle timestamp data in string format, converting it to integer format for compatibility with existing systems.
• Non-Strict Validation: Maintains non-strict validation mode to handle potential type coercion of timestamp data, preserving compatibility with older billing versions.
• Unit Test Coverage: Adds a new unit test to verify the conversion of string-based expiration dates to integer format during bulk plan retrieval.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[gemini-code-assist]

Warning

Gemini is experiencing higher than usual traffic and was unable to create the review. Please try again in a few hours by commenting /gemini review.

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[github-actions]

Pyrefly Diff

No changes detected.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 77.45%. Comparing base (40846c2) to head (fe847ad).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #33831      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.45%   77.45%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        4422     4422              
  Lines      177524   177524              
  Branches    34144    34144              
==========================================
- Hits       137497   137496       -1     
  Misses      36781    36781              
- Partials     3246     3247       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
api	76.68% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.