fix(crwa): remove yarn install preference

[jtoar]

@Tobbe told me he couldn't run yarn create redwood-app with yarn v1. I was able to reproduce and so was @Josh-Walker-GM:

$ yarn create redwood-app test
yarn create v1.22.21
[1/4] 🔍  Resolving packages...
[2/4] 🚚  Fetching packages...
[3/4] 🔗  Linking dependencies...
[4/4] 🔨  Building fresh packages...

success Installed "create-redwood-app@6.6.2" with binaries:
      - create-redwood-app
[########################################################################################] 88/88------------------------------------------------------------------
                🌲⚡️ Welcome to RedwoodJS! ⚡️🌲
------------------------------------------------------------------
✔ Compatibility checks passed
✔ Creating your Redwood app in test based on command line argument
✔ Select your preferred language · TypeScript
✔ Do you want to initialize a git repo? · no / Yes
✔ Enter a commit message · Initial commit
✔ Do you want to run yarn install? · no / Yes
✔ Project files created
✔ Installed node modules
✔ Generated types
✔ Initialized a git repo with commit message "Initial commit"

Thanks for trying out Redwood!

 ⚡️ Get up and running fast with this Quick Start guide: https://redwoodjs.com/quick-start

Fire it up! 🚀

 > cd test
 > yarn rw dev

✨  Done in 100.70s.
$ cd test
$ yarn rw dev
Internal Error: root-workspace-0b6124@workspace:.: This package doesn't seem to be present in your lockfile; run "yarn install" to update the lockfile
    ...

I'm not sure if this is new as of yarn v4 or not, but I think it's time we removed the yarn install preference in CRWA; I brought it up before in #9786 (comment) but we held off at the time.

@Tobbe I'm happy to cherry pick this into the next branch and release a patch.

[Tobbe]

I think the logic is flipped here. We should always include the instruction to run yarn install now, right?
(Hold changing anything, I'm still reviewing)

[jtoar]

Yep you're right I think oversight on my part in making this too fast

[Tobbe]

I think this change should be reverted

[Tobbe]

Closing this in favor of #9861