I will note, though, that the guidelines recommend not specifying the extension of the manpages in the %files section; you can't guarantee that gzip will always be the compression format used. That's probably why more packages never ran into this and why my "random sample" build tests didn't fail. I need to do a full rebuild before pushing this as an actual update in any case.
That's a very good point and something I noticed when I was investigating this; I ended up re-reading that section of the packaging guidelines. I'll probably check all my packages to make sure they don't accidentally say ".gz". Assuming the compression always adds an extension (can't think why that wouldn't be the case?), I'd have thought that instead of specifying "%{_mandir}/man1/foo.1*" as the guidelines suggest, it would be safer to specify "%{_mandir}/man1/foo.1.*" to ensure it doesn't accidentally pick up an uncompressed file.
Richard