kraken-cli deployment automation vs PM2 process management for production health monitoring

Goal is to deploy a KrakenJS application to production while preserving its configuration-driven environment isolation and strict folder structure loading.

KrakenJS provides a built-in CLI for scaffolding and deployment that automates production-ready configurations. An alternative is manual process management with an external process manager for granular health monitoring. The framework relies on environment-specific settings isolated in separate files and internal dependency injection decoupled from HTTP transport.

The decision is unresolved because the trade-off between rapid setup via integrated deployment scripts and finer control over health monitoring is not clear for this constraint.

What configuration loading behavior is expected when using external process management instead of the CLI deployment automation? Does the built-in deployment automation provide process restart and health monitoring comparable to an external process manager? Which approach preserves the framework's strict folder structure loading guarantees in production?