feat: add strict mode

[pimlie]

Ref: #81

Strict mode is currently only used for toggling compromised lock behaviour

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #86 into master will increase coverage by 1.70%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master       #86      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   98.29%   100.00%   +1.70%     
===========================================
  Files           4         6       +2     
  Lines         176       205      +29     
  Branches       45        50       +5     
===========================================
+ Hits          173       205      +32     
+ Misses          3         0       -3     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lib/lockfile.js	100.00% <100.00%> (+2.45%)	⬆️
test/util/wait.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/mtime-precision.js	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 1a478a4...c19d934. Read the comment docs.

[satazor]

@pimlie I would prefer to not add any option and actually make this the default. This means that the PR would be much simpler by just changing this to not throw:

node-proper-lockfile/lib/lockfile.js

Line 240 in c0cdea2

return releasedCallback &&

[pimlie]

@satazor What about still removing the lock when its compromised? I guess you are opposed to that?

The reason I added it because I actually like the idea that both processes will generate a warning untill we figured out why the lock was compromised in the first place.

[satazor]

If the lock has been compromised, it usually means that someone else got the lock. It would be bad to delete the lock in that situation.

[pimlie]

Updated as requested :)