fix location for custom/options/license

[yearski]

I tested and confirm the custom/options/license location. My distro package (Arch) does not include options/license so I'm only guess there but it seems consistent with location in repo.

[techknowlogick]

This PR will be overridden by #15559, but could you instead add this documentation to the cheat-sheet page: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/master/docs/content/doc/advanced/config-cheat-sheet.en-us.md

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #15669 (20aaa93) into master (2e85165) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #15669      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   43.90%   43.93%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         678      678              
  Lines       81756    81756              
==========================================
+ Hits        35898    35922      +24     
+ Misses      40010    39989      -21     
+ Partials     5848     5845       -3     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
models/repo_list.go	77.04% <0.00%> (-0.78%)	⬇️
services/pull/pull.go	43.47% <0.00%> (-0.46%)	⬇️
models/gpg_key.go	54.07% <0.00%> (+0.56%)	⬆️
services/gitdiff/gitdiff.go	73.65% <0.00%> (+1.41%)	⬆️
services/pull/patch.go	55.93% <0.00%> (+1.69%)	⬆️
modules/charset/charset.go	73.73% <0.00%> (+2.02%)	⬆️
services/pull/check.go	28.76% <0.00%> (+2.73%)	⬆️
services/pull/temp_repo.go	29.78% <0.00%> (+3.19%)	⬆️
modules/util/timer.go	85.71% <0.00%> (+42.85%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2e85165...20aaa93. Read the comment docs.

[techknowlogick]

Thanks for this PR, and your other one. I will close this one per my comment above, and that you have made the other one :)

[yearski]

I know I'm being a bit pendantic, but would you mind committing this one as well? I know it will get thrown away but if anyone is ever looking at old code, it'd be nice for it to be accurate.