feat: Allow bypassing invalidateAll in enhance

[elliott-with-the-longest-name-on-github]

Closes #9476.

Adds an invalidateAll option to the callback from enhance. Setting this option to false will cause enhance not to skip the invalidation step.

Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following:

• It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
• This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
• Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.

Tests

• Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint and pnpm check

Changesets

• If your PR makes a change that should be noted in one or more packages' changelogs, generate a changeset by running pnpm changeset and following the prompts. Changesets that add features should be minor and those that fix bugs should be patch. Please prefix changeset messages with feat:, fix:, or chore:.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 8742429

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
@sveltejs/kit	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[Rich-Harris]

Hmm. I'm not sure I love this pattern of adding more options to update. As mentioned in #9476, we already provide the tools to achieve the desired outcome; this might be superficially more convenient, but it's API clutter that leaves us with multiple ways of doing things.

With hindsight I sort of wish we hadn't added the reset option but instead focused on composable APIs.

[elliott-with-the-longest-name-on-github]

@dummdidumm @Rich-Harris

Let's either choose to do this or close this PR. I'm for merging it (not because I'm the author, just because it's useful) -- I agree we can probably come up with a better / more declarative API for v2, but this is, IMO, a good solution for now.