Add new licenses to dependency review config

[jeffpaul]

What?

In researching GPL-compatible licenses today, don't ask it was a rabbit hole sort of a day, I noticed there were updates to the Gutenberg approved GPL-compatible license list that we might as well inherit into our list here.

This PR adds BlueOak-1.0.0, ODC-By-1.0, W3C-20150513, and WTFPL to be current with updated licenses from Gutenberg last updated in WordPress/gutenberg@f58d958#diff-9f449756c2a6bc09b38edf1c3355523a0fb226ab2a2e7d1800a3a52cb34b35f8.

You can continue to read through the blame in the Gutenberg repo to see where licenses besides Blue Oak are added in, after reading through git history I'm content updating to add these licenses to our listing here.

Why?

How?

Testing Instructions

Testing Instructions for Keyboard

Screenshots or screencast

Before	After

[github-actions]

The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the props-bot label.

If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.

Co-authored-by: jeffpaul <jeffpaul@git.wordpress.org>
Co-authored-by: dkotter <dkotter@git.wordpress.org>

To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook.

[dkotter]

Changes look good here but noticing the dependency check is now failing:

Unable to fetch or parse config file: Invalid license(s) in allow-licenses: BSD, BSD-3-Clause-W3C, MIT/X11

[jeffpaul]

Ok, those three are probably failing because they're not legit SPDX identifiers. So while they might get referenced in a license file for something we're pulling in, better to leave them off the list since it'll make the action complain (and if a dependency gets flagged with those licenses we can still manually approve the PR).