Also, Vulkan isn't popular with game developers because availability sucks. Vulkan doesn't run on macOS. Or iOS. Or 40% of Android phones. Or Xbox. Or PlayStation. Or Nintendo Switch[1].
Unless you are targeting Windows (which has DirectX and OpenGL already), or those 60% of Android phones only, or Linux, why would you use Vulkan? On Windows, DirectX is a generally-superior alternative, and you get Xbox support basically free, and if you also support an older DirectX, much broader PC compatibility. On Android, just use OpenGL, and don't worry about separate implementations for the bifurcated Vulkan/OpenGL support. On Linux, just use Proton with an older DirectX. Whiz bang, no need for Vulkan whatsoever. Yes, some systems might perform better if you had a Vulkan over OpenGL, but is the cost worth it when you don't need it?
[1] Technically, Vulkan does exist for Nintendo Switch, but it is so slow almost no production game uses it, and it is widely considered not an option. Nintendo Switch is slow enough without Vulkan making it slower. Much easier just to use the proprietary NVIDIA library.
Very few applications in the grand scheme of things use Vulkan, and a minority of games do.
Therefore the ROI on supporting OpenGL is very high.
It's an accident of history more than anything else. Once the reverse engineering is further along, I expect a Vulkan driver to be written for it, and the Gallium one to be phased out in favor of Zink.
My understanding is that this hardware abstraction layer for mesa is way easier to implement than a full vulkan driver, especially since the earlier versions of OpenGL only require a small subset of the features that a vulkan driver requires.