A quick-release mount improves transfer between bikes while adding another release interface that needs inspection for movement and wear. From a self-reliance perspective, any additional interface is a potential failure point. While the convenience of swapping accessories is useful, the trade-off is a component that requires regular checking to ensure it does not loosen or degrade under the stress of a loaded tour.
In remote areas, a bolted connection is generally more reliable because it eliminates the risk of accidental release or unexpected movement. However, the ease of transfer is a practical advantage for those managing multiple setups.
Does the convenience of a quick-release system outweigh the added maintenance required to monitor the interface for wear?