Fix #14223 (CI: Build windows release binary with mingw for comparisons)

[danmar]

No description provided.

[firewave]

Any reason for this? There's certainly more important things than opening this palette of cans of worms...

The MinGW support is not stable and thus cannot not be used for release builds (see the simplecpp issues). First we need sort out everything on the simplecpp side and make the simplecpp CI complete. After that all the CI improvements regarding MinGW (and Cygwin) also need to be applied to Cppcheck which will probably unearth more issues.

Also the MinGW builds in Cppcheck never went through the full CI sweep and only used very basic checks. So after the CI has been adjusted with the simplecpp improvements we need to apply the full CI sweep to MinGW as well.

[danmar]

Any reason for this? There's certainly more important things than opening this palette of cans of worms...

Performance. I have seen ~3 times faster cppcheck analysis in selfchecks.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[firewave]

Performance. I have seen ~3 times faster cppcheck analysis in selfchecks.

Then we should add a selfcheck with MinGW and Visual Studio to the CI to show that. But before that we should get in some of the WIP performance work as even more long-running jobs will make the selfchecks in the CI even more annoying.

But as mentioned above it will take some work before MinGW can be even considered for production use. Given the speed things have been progressing recently it will be at least a few months ago given the open issues I outlined above.