Add --disable-checks flag to deploy

[iameskild]

Fixes | Closes | Resolves #

Please remove anything marked as optional that you don't need to fill in.
Choose one of the keywords preceding to refer to the issue this PR solves, followed by the issue number (e.g Fixes # 666).
If there is no issue, remove the line. Remove this note after reading.

Changes introduced in this PR:

-Under special circumstances, users might need to disable the checks that take place at the end of each stage. This new flags allows for that possibility.

Types of changes

What types of changes does your PR introduce?

Put an x in the boxes that apply

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds a feature)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing features to not work as expected)
• Documentation Update
• Code style update (formatting, renaming)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no API changes)
• Build related changes
• Other (please describe):

Testing

Requires testing

• Yes
• No

In case you checked yes, did you write tests?

• Yes
• No

Documentation

Does your contribution include breaking changes or deprecations?
If so have you updated the documentation?

• Yes, docstrings
• Yes, main documentation
• Yes, deprecation notices

Further comments (optional)

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered and more.

[costrouc]

I often find double negatives harder to reason about but don't have a strong opinion that it must be this way. What do you think?

provision_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config, disable_checks)

def provision_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config, disable_checks=False):
      if not disable_checks:
          ...

vs.

provision_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config, (not disable_checks))

def provision_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config, check=True):
      if check:
          ...

[iameskild]

Yeah I understand where you're coming from. In this case, I feel like it reads in a fairly comprehensible way but I'm open to other options as well. I do find this pattern a little confusing myself provision_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config, (not disable_checks)).

Perhaps we could do something like this instead:

    if disable_checks:
        return 
    checks.stage_02_infrastructure(stage_outputs, config