fix: hide the note if the expiration date is equal to the expected date.

[przemekwrona]

Summary:

Issue https://github.com/MobilityData/gtfs-validator/pull/2039

While validating a GTFS feed, I received the following message: feedEndDate: 20250712, suggestedExpirationDate: 20250712

This message is confusing because the suggestedExpirationDate is the same as the feedEndDate, which might imply that the feed is expiring exactly when it ends — but no further action or recommendation is provided. It's unclear whether this is intended or if the feed should include more future service dates.

Expected behavior:

If the dates are the same and no issue is present, the validator should not flag this message as a warning or should clarify that the feed is valid until its last service date.

Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!

• [x] Run the unit tests with gradle test to make sure you didn't break anything
• [x] Add or update any needed documentation to the repo
• [x] Format the title like "feat: [new feature short description]". Title must follow the Conventional Commit Specification(https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/).
• [x] Linked all relevant issues
• [x] Include screenshot(s) showing how this pull request works and fixes the issue(s)

[welcome[bot]]

Thanks for opening this pull request! You're awesome. We use semantic commit messages to streamline the release process. Before your pull request can be merged, you should update your pull request title to start with a semantic prefix. Examples of titles with semantic prefixes:

• fix: Bug with ssl network connections + Java module permissions.
• feat: Initial support for multiple @PrimaryKey annotations.
• docs: update RELEASE.md with new process To get this PR to the finish line, please do the following:
• Read our Contribution Guidelines
• Follow Google Java style coding standards
• Include tests when adding/changing behavior
• Include screenshots

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[emmambd]

Thanks for working on this clarification @przemekwrona! One minor suggested change.